ed; but it is merely asserted on we hear of no priest. With me one side and indignantly denied that would be a strong presumpon the other. If attempted to tion in her fayout, even if I be proved, the proof is attempted could discover, in other respects, by the Government. If the grounds for doubt. She has tale is brought us, they are the kept clear of this description of tale-bearers. If we know any persons. She is unpolluted with thing even of the charge, the this pest; and this is a shield of foundation of the charge has ten-fold security. There has been laid by the government, hardly been a single instance, of and at the nation's expence. sublime, magnificent turpitude, But the ugly part of the story is, in which a priest, of one sort or that the Queen might have got another, has not had a hand. rid of all trouble at once by re- She has had priests and lawceiving 50,000l. a year and yers, and men notoriously unjust, quitting the kingdom, after the and cruel for her enemies. She charge had been made! She is hated by those who hate a might have gone, honoured freedom and all merit. These with a royal yacht for a convey-are strong recommendations, if ance, introduced as Queen of she had no other; and, as to England at a foreign court, and have a princely income, paid by us, to spend with her alleged paramour; and, after some years, passed in this way, she might have returned and, been seated on the throne as our law-doctrine! This doctrine would ful sovereign. This is the ugly give a people a right to inquire part of the story; and it proves as clear as day-light, that all the pretences about a regard for the nation's morals are the offspring of the vilest hypocrisy.

her ruin being necessary to the preservation of our morals, it is. the most base pretence that ever came from the lips of hypocrite,

Slender indeed is the right to reign, if it depend on such a

into the chastity of every Queen and every Princess. It would give them a right to reject a King as well as a Queen. It would give them a right to dethrone one as well as the other, unless we were to adopt the maxim of this profligate parson,

Amongst all the persons whom her Majesty is said to have had in her suite, in her confidence, or in her household, that, in the husband, that is to

an immoral man; or may be falsely accused of it, and, there can seldom be a pretence wanting for setting him aside. Now, no Radical has ever broached a doctrine like this; and, the pretended loyal men have the exclusive honour of the invention,

This parson growls most wolf-tional morals, what security is like against the Radicals. It is there for a King? He may be very provoking, to be sure, that they should be able to prove by their conduct the truth of what they have always asserted in words; that they are the really loyal part of the king's subjects. They endeavour to protect the Queen, while they utter not a word against the King. Their Blackstone, in speaking of the enemies attack the Queen. This, Revolution, says, that it was at once, shows who are the loyal right; but, that it is impossible aud who the disloyal. This to conceive the existence of anomust be very provoking to our ther case when it would be right. revilers; and it is as pleasing to Thorough-paced lawyer, as hế› us. Those revilers have been was, he did not say, that it now driven into a strange dilem-might never be possible to find ma; they must side with us and out a justification for a revoluthe Queen against her persecution again; but, if he had lived tors, or they must side with 'till now, he would have been those persecutors, and bear a told, that to preserve the naportion of the hatred, which the tional morals might, at any time, heart of man allots them. They be just cause for doing what he have chosen the latter; but, then, found it so very hampering to their path is strewed with reconcile with law.

thorns. To maintain, that a If it be necessary to unqucen

1

a queen for the preservation of sides, empty, vaini, conceited, morals, why not unking a king drunken, faithless, cruel, and with the same object in view, if cowardly, and all these in the it should ever happen, that the extreme; even if we were ever king's example was calculated to have a king of this horrid deto injure, the morals of the peo-scription, in whom should be ple? So, really, this new doc-met all the viees without one trine is a complete oversetter of single virtue; if there were to all our notions of hereditary meet in him passion without right and of the sacredness of tenderness, vindictiveness with the king's person. I deny the out gratitude, greediness without doctrine: I say its false I say, economy; and, in short, suppose that the king's right to reign is what you will, if you can sup not to be taken away upon a pose any thing worse than this, charge of immorality: I say, suppose all the fooleries and that let a king be, in morals, faults of all the silliest of women what he may, if we should ever joined to all the sins of all the have a king, who was not only wickedest of men; soppose all a bad, and savage husband and this, and even then, I say, that father; not only debauched and it would be high treason to pro abandoned as to women; not pose to unking even such a king' only a contemner of the mar- as this, upon the ground that his riage-vow, a seducer of other example would be injurious tợ men's wives, the reputed father the morals of the people. This of a whole litter of bastards, is an extreme case, to be sure and, in short, who pursued his It will be said, that I have supdebaucheries till he became the posed a monster rather than a sport of his mistresses and their man, and that I have only to favourite paramours, till his em-clap a tail to him to make him a braces became disgusting, en-devil but devil as he might dured only for the pecuniary be, still I say, that to propose to advantage to be derived from set him aside for the sake of them, and till all the nation was the morals of the nation would shocked with the odiousness and be high treason. What would nauseousness of his filthy and be to be done, then? Why, he ludicrous amours; who was not must remain, to be sure, atid only all this, but who was be- the people must take care» if??

their own morals. But, if this For the purpose of making her be the case with regard to a supposed example of importking, what ground can the par-ance, the Queen is a great person have for endeavouring to sonage; but, for the purpose of persuade us, that the national preparing the way for her demorals ought to be put forward gradation, she is a mere subas cause for setting aside a queen?ject. Such tricks only serve to Are a queen's morals every show the badness of the cause, thing, and those of a king no-in which they are employed. thing? Is her example of such vast consequence, and his example of no consequence at all? Is the example of the sovereign" a man to put away his wife, himself of no importance to us," save only for adultery." Now, while the example of his con- then, the Bill of Pains and Pesort is of such tremendous im-nalties proposes to put the portance? There is great de- Queen away; and, if it be not light exhibited by those, who proved, as I am sure it will not, talk of the Queen as a mere sub-that she has been guilty of adulject. The debauched crew seem tery, will you approve of this

Suffer me now, reverend Sirs, to remind you, that the Scripture says, that "it is not lawful for

Bill; and will you not petition against it? But, indeed, the Bill does not accuse her of adultery. And yet the reverend calumniator of Manchester highly approves of the Bill, and he bit

to enjoy themselves in pulling her Majesty down to the state of a mere subject. She is something more. It is high treason to conspire against her life, and, besides, she is one of the contingent claimants to the throne it-terly reproaches the people beself. But, if she be nothing cause they do not approve of it more than a mere subject, why too. He calls upon the noble, is such a fuss made about the the rich, and the strong "to moral evils of her supposed ex- put on the whole armour of ample? Falsehood should al-" the Lord of Hosts," and to ways have a good memory; fight those who are opposed to but, the truth is, falsehood can- this Bill! And yet this Bill pronot long remain consistent: it poses to put away the king's must confine itself to one point, wife without even accusing her

or it is sure to betray it's nature. of adultery.

"Those whom God hath join | quantity of bribery, perjury, ed together, let not man put lying, drunkenness, and, by reasunder," says the parson's moving much of the poverty, prayer-book, but, the parson greatly lessen the quantity of is of a contrary opinion. The thievery, robbery, murder, and parson is for putting away the suicide. And, as all these things Queen by the hands of men, are directly in the teeth of relithough he has many times taken gion, we are quite surprised, his fee after forbidding such an that the clergy are amongst the act in a voice the most solemn. most bitter enemies, instead of In short, the attempt of this being the warmest friends, of parson is a most furious blow at Reform. clerical sincerity.

The mystery in both cases

It has been a subject of as-admits of the same solution. In tonishment with many, though our notions of clergymen, we not with me, that the clergy sublimate and refine too much. should have discovered such a feeling, or, rather, such a want of feeling, in the cause of the Queen. But, men in general take things for what they appear to be. There is a great deal in habit too. We are accustomed to confound religion with those who profess to teach

We forget, that they eat and drink like other men. We, in short, forget their temporalities, and this is a part of their concerns which we ought never to forget. They have most comfortable livings. They do little, and have good cheer. It is natural, therefore, that they should have great hatred against any body, whose efforts tend to the disturbing of this state of things. It is very certain, that some

it; and we naturally wonder, that parsons should not be men must undergo bodily lafriendly towards the Queen, seeing that such friendship is called for by every principle of religion. The same may be said as to the question of reform.

bour. Without this the world could not go on. But, there is a desire in every man to live without this bodily labour; to live at ease, while others labour, and, of course, to live on that labour. So that the parsons are by no means singular in their taste. They enjoy a large portion of the good things of this world: perhaps the choicest moral effects. We know, that portion of all. It is, therefore, it would infinitely lessen the very natural, that they should

We know, that a reform, though great in its political effects. would be still greater in its