« AnteriorContinuar »
the measure, there was a general disruption of party ties; and in some instances even of personal friendships and family intercourse. The opposition in both houses supported government, while the usual supporters of government were divided; the members of the royal family were divided; and the episcopal bench were divided ;-there being for the measure, the bishops of Chester, Derry, Kildare, Llandaff, Lichfield and Coventry, Oxford, Rochester, St. David's, and Winchester; and against it, the two Archbishops of England, the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishops of Bath and Wells, Bristol, Carlisle, Chichester, Durham, Ely, Exeter, Gloucester, Hereford, Lincoln, London, Meath, Peterborough, Salisbury, St. Asaph, and Worcester. Many of these right reverend personages, on both sides, delivered their sentiments on the occasion. The bishops of Lichfield, Chester, and Winchester, as well as some other speakers in both houses, urged the measure on religious as well as merely political grounds, considering that it was requisite not only for the civil peace of Ireland, but for the promotion of true piety and the Protestant faith. We shall not argue the matter again on either side its good or evil cannot now be reversed; our hope, our belief still inclines to the opinion that it tends to the former; but much of its
effect will depend upon the temper of Protestants; upon their zeal and piety and conciliating temper, and rejection of party spirit. Two things we believe, politically speaking, are clear: the one, that it was this measure alone, which prevented a rebellion in Ireland, for which twelve months since the populace seemed ripe, and which if subdued by British bayonets would have cost a fearful expenditure of treasure and blood; the other, that in consequence of it the Catholic priest and the political agitator have lost their strongest hold upon the minds of the people; so that the popular Mr. O'Connell himself has lost his boasted power, and has striven in vain to urge the people of Ireland to embrace his fond scheme for the repeal of the Union.
But the great question, after all, was, not the worldly policy, but the religious rectitude of the measure. And here we must appeal to what has already appeared in our pages; only warning our readers, in conclusion, to beware, whatever may be their sentiments on this question, that they sink not the Christian in the politician, or amuse themselves with discussing matters of state, while they forget their own higher and eternal interests as candidates for an eternal world. The caution may seem to come in hastily and abruptly: but no Christian will say that it is unnecessary.