an elder of the Presbyterian congregation there, although Harris tells us he had removed from Scotland in the reign of King Charles the First, to avoid taking the solemn league and covenant.

In the year 1662 he was sent to a classical school at Dungannon, and on the 18th of April, 1667, was admitted into Trinity College, Dublin, where his extraordinary parts and application were soon rewarded with a scholarship and a native's place. In 1670 he took the degree of bachelor, and in 1763 that of master of arts, when he was ordained a deacon by Dr. Robert Mossom, bishop of Derry.

Upon a week's warning, at the Provost's command, he offered himself a candidate for a vacant fellowship; in which though he did not succeed, being junior of all, yet he acquitted himself with so much honour to his character, that it gave rise to his recommendation to Dr. John Parker, Archbishop of Tuam, who took him into his protection, ordained him a priest, and appointed him his domestic chaplain. In the year 1676 the Archbishop promoted him to the prebend of Kilmanemore, in the cathedral of Tuam, and afterwards to the provostship of that church.

While Mr. King was in this situation, he applied himself closely to the study of all useful learning, wisely considering that his academical acquisitions, great as they undoubtedly were, ought to be considered merely as initiatory, and serving only to qualify him for a vigorous prosecution of the studies of his sacred profession. Here he laid the foundation of that knowledge which enabled him afterwards, at a most critical time, to become so eminently serviceable to the church and state. His patron, who had himself felt in his earlier days the hard hand of adversity, took great pains in improving and directing his extraordinary parts to their proper employment, which he plainly perceived were ripening to qualify him to shine in those higher stations of the church, to which Providence designed him. Nor was he disappointed, but every day more and more confirmed in the high opinion he had conceived of his superior talents and excellent qualifications; and therefore when his grace was promoted to the see of Dublin, he collated Mr. King to the chancellorship of St. Patrick's, to which the parish of St. Werburg is annexed, in which he was installed on the 29th of October 1679.-In this cure he laboured with exemplary diligence and success. He knew the Popish controversies well-a species of knowledge which, unfashionable and rare as it is at the present day, he then found useful, in enabling him to keep his flock safe from being perverted to the church of Rome by those numberless emissaries who, upon the prospect of the Duke of York's accession to the throne, swarmed through the kingdom to make proselytes. Among these proselytes was Dr. Manby, dean of Derry. He had soli

cited the Lord Primate for a bishopric, and being disappointed, resolved to go with the tide and rise by the Popish interest. He then published an apology, intitled, "The Considerations which obliged him to embrace the Catholic Religion." This book, though written without method or connexion, and though every page of it shewed that the author was not ac quainted with close thinking or reasoning, yet was much boasted of by the Popish party as an extraordinary performance. Mr. King took it to pieces, and gave such solid answers to every argument in it as were not to be confuted, publishing his reply in London in 1687. In consequence of this and similar exertions, Mr. Breviter, a clergyman of the diocese of Derry, who published a "Vindication of the Mission of the Clergy of the Churches of England and Ireland," in 1728, observed (page 153) hat Dr. King wrote against the Papists when Popery was in its zenith, and was the only clergyman in Ireland who did so, his book being twice reprinted in England.

As to Manby, his character and the credit he brought to the cause he adopted, will best appear by the following letter of the Earl of Clarendon, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, written to Lord Sunderland on the 2d of March, 1685-6.

"As to Dr. Manby, Dean of Derry, with your lordship's leave I will tell you his story. On the 18th of January he came to me, the first time I ever saw or heard of him in my life and desired a licence to go for England. I told him there were too many of the clergy of this kingdom there already; that in the few days I had been here, two others had been with me on the same errand, but I had refused them both, as I should do him, except he could give me very good reasons why he desired to go, his majesty expecting that his clergy of this kingdom should reside upon their cures. He told me he had a suit at law in Londonderry, and desired to go into England to advise about it. I said it was very strange for a man to go into England to take advice about a law-suit in Ireland: that I doubted it was in truth to avoid a law-suit here: to which he replied, that he saw ill offices had been done to him. I assured him, he was mistaken; for nobody had done him ill or good offices; which was most true, I having never heard of him till that moment; and so he went away without saying any thing else; or telling me what, or with whom his suit was. I have never seen him since, till Sunday the 21st past, when he came to me early in the morning, and told me, he was undone if I did not help him. I asked him, what was the matter? he said be would now tell me truly, what his suit of law was. He said he had informed upon oath against one Mr. Norman of Londonderry, of very horrible words spoken against his Majesty, when duke; that the government

#

had bound him over to prosecute the said Norman, at the next assizes; and that he was sure, all that country was so ill affected, that no jury would be got to find Norman guilty. I asked him if he were ready on his part to prosecute? he said he had none but his own evidence. I told him that that would be enough in case of misdemeanor, and I would take care the judges should be well instructed, and a loyal jury should be found. He then told me in plain terms, he would not go down to Londonderry; but earnestly pressed me, to order Mr. Attorney General to enter a noli prosequi. I wished him to have a motion made in Court, upon what suggestions he thought fit, to put off the trial: to which he said he never meant to prosecute the matter: now Norman was put out of the commission of the peace he had his end. I told him that was not enough, if he bad spoken so ill words as he had pretended, Norman ought to suffer a greater punishment, than being put out of the commission of the peace. At last he told me, he could not go to the assizes without hazard of his life, for going ten miles in a coach put him into fits of the stone and strangury; to which I told him, it was above ten miles from Holyhead to London to that be made no reply.

:

"If he does not appear at the assizes he will suffer nothing but the forfeiting his recognizance; which shall not be estreated without his Majesty's pleasure signified by your lordship. I have not thought fit to direct a noli prosequi; if I had, I am certain, the first news would have been that he was ready to prosecute; but that my Lord Lieutenant would not suffer him; and had caused a noli prosequi to be entered, whereby a fanatic was kept from justice.

"I could entertain your lordship with a great deal more of this dean; how in two times that he was with me, I catched him in several lies; but I think I have been too tedious already. He told me, he was engaged to go to the king's county at the assizes to prosecute another person there for words, likewise spoken some years since against his Majesty. When he returns, he shall have leave to go into England if he desires it, as your lordship directs.

"I never met with any man, who has a worse character than this dean; which I am very sorry for because of his coat. When he went out from me, the company in the next room wondered why I would be in private with such a fellow: but in truth, my lord, I was not alone with him, nor would willingly be with any such creatures." (State Letters of Henry Earl of Clarendon, Vol. I. p. 80, Dublin, 1765)

(To be continued.)

OBSERVATIONS ON DR. DROMGOLE'S SPEECH, BY SIR RICHARD MUSGRAVE, BART.-LETTER III.

Having, in my last letter, given the origin and policy of the papal supremacy, usurped by Gregory VII. I shall now present the reader with some specimens of the sanguinary and intolerant canons which he and his successors framed to maintain it, by a system of terror.*

It was ordained by the 3d Lateran Council, held under Pope Alexander III. A. D. 1179," that all those who are any way bound to heretics, are absolved from all fidelity and obedience due to them, as long as they persist in their iniquity."-Concil. apud Binium, tom. vii. p. 608.)-By the 3d Canon of the 4th Lateran Council, under Pope Innocent III. the Roman Pontiff is not only empowered, but commanded to dethrone sovereign princes who shall refuse to extirpate heretics within their territories, by absolving their subjects from their oaths of allegiance, and to transfer them to others who shall enjoy them without contradiction, provided they extirpate the heretics therein.-(Idem, tom. xi. p. 148, 149.) -Pope Gregory IX. in the 13th century, decreed thus-" Be it known to all, who are under the dominion of heretics, that they are set free from every tie of fidelity, all oaths and solemn engagements to the contrary not. withstanding."-Decret. Greg. lib. v. tit. 7.)-According to the determination of Innocent III. which is inserted in the body of the canon law, "they are not to be called oaths, but perjuries, which are attempted contrary to the interest of the church."-(Decretal, lib. ii. tit. 24. cap. 27); and consequently, all oaths taken to an heretical state, (and such is England deemed by the adherents of the Pope,) are null and void, both by the general councils and canon law of the Romish church. By the 3d canon of the 4th Lateran council, it is decreed, that they who, under the badge of the cross, shall set about the extirpation of heretics, shall enjoy a full remission of their sins.-(Concil. Binii, tom. xi. p. 148.); and great indulgences are granted to those who shall do so, by the 3d Lateran council, cap. 27.-(Idem, tom. vii. p. 662).-By various canons of the Romish church, the following punishments must be inflicted on heretics

* It is most certain, that none of the doctrines of Popery existed previously to the Pontificate of Gregory VII. except the worship of images; which was fraudulently introduced by the seventh general council, in the year 784. All the peculiar tenets of Popery were framed by different Popes and councils, between the year 1073 and the year 1545, when, as I before observed, they were united in a new creed, formed by Pope Pius IV. Doctor Bramhall, Primate of Ireland, observed on this: "those very points, which Pope Pius IV. comprehended in a symbol or creed, were obtruded upon us by his predecessors, as necessary articles of the Romish faith. This is the only difference, that Pope Pius IV. dealt in the gross, his predecessors by retail: they fashioned the several rods, and he bound them into a bundle."-(Vol. I. Discuss. 3d, p. 222.)

excommunication, confiscation of their goods, imprisonment, exile, death. -(Concil. Binii, tom. xi. p. 608.)-If any bishop be negligent in purging his diocese of heretical pravity, by the 3d canon of the 4th Lateran council, he must be deprived of his episcopal dignity.-Idem, tom. xi. p. 152.); also by the council of Constance.-(Sess. 45. tom. vii. p. 1122.); and by the canon law-(Decretal, lib. v. tit. 7. cap. 13.)→ Bishops are also bound to do so by their oaths of consecration.* "If any persons, after their death, shall be found to have been heretics, their bodoies shall be dug up and burnt."-(Concil. Alb. can. iii. p. 727. Binii.) -The civil magistrates shall be compelled, by ecclesiastical censures, to dig up their bodies.-(Idem, can. xxvii. p. 728.)-According to this, the bodies of Wickliff, Bucer and Fagius, were dug up and burnt in Queen Mary's reign.

The general council of Constance requires all archbishops, bishops, and other persons elect, to admonish and require all sovereign princes, to expel all heretics out of their territories, according to the 27th canon of the 3d Lateran council, under pain of excommunication.-(Sess. 45. tom. vii. p. 1121. apud Binium.)-The Popes are invested with a plenitude of temporal power over all states and sovereign princes, by the general councils and canon law, which are counted of infallible authority: by the 4th Lateran council, can. 3d; by the general Council of Lyons, tom. xi. Binii, p. 645; by the council of Pisa, Sess. 14; by the general council of Constance, Sess. 12, 17, 37; and of Basil, Sess. 24, 34, 43, 41; all which have expressly decreed, that the Pope shall depose and deprive sovereign princes of their dominions, their dignity and honour, for misde meanours mentioned therein.

All inquisitors of heretical pravity appointed by the Pope, all arch bishops and bishops, in their respective provinces and dioceses, with their officials, are bound to search for, and apprehend heretics.—(Concil. tom. xi. p. 619.-The civil magistrate must assist them in inquiring after, taking, and spoiling, heretics, by sending soldiers with them, under very severe penalties.-(Concil. tom. xi p. 608)-They are empowered also to compel any persons even the whole neighbourhood, to swear, that if they know of any heretics, or of those who receive, favour or defend them, they will inform the bishops or inquisitors thereof.-(Constit. Innocent IV. cap. 30.)-The same is required by the council of Thoulouse, can. 1.-(Concil. tom. xi. p. 428.)

By the 3d canon of the 4th council of Lateran. (Concil. tom. xi. part 1. p. 152;) and by the general council of Constance,(Sess. 45, tom. vii. p. 1120, Binii.),-whoever apprehends heretics, (which all

* The substance of the oath will be given in this letter.

VOL. III. [Prot. Adv. Oct. 1814.]

G