8
moved by either the philological or logical finesse of Mr. G. His assertion, p. 89, that protestants industriously circulate a book, in which more wickedness may be learned than in all the Tax-tables, has no doubt reference to the Whole Duty of Man. The writer, indulgently, I suppose, adds, that he "need not specify it." This is the very matter which led the Hon. and Rev. Mr. Spencer into a labyrinth of puerile blunders. The Rector of Sutton Coldfield put him to complete rout and shame on the subject; and the publication of his own Letters on Auricular Confession, together with those of his opponent, who, characteristically enough, had published his own separately by themselves, has demonstrated not only the vile iniquity of the Confessional, but the utter impotence of the new comparative argument set up in its defence. If Mr. G. could have pointed to a popular manual among us, containing the filthy pages which dis. grace a popular manual well-known by himself, the "Garden of the Soul" — pages, of which the intrinsic uncleanness is the slightest part of their guilt; for they acquire a satanic virulence by the practical consequences which can hardly fail to follow the atrocious instructions of such "sure guides" as Dens and others, — pages, so revolting as to render it expedient that another book should be provided as a substitute for decent Romanists, females especially — could he have done this, he would have done something; but he knows he cannot.
It may be my defect of sagacity, but I can discern no other quality than that of quibbling in the note p. 92, on the phrase in foro conscientiæ; and apprehend, that in the presence of leading arguments it is worth little, and may be left to its own insignificance; at least so I am content to leave it.
What I read in p. 88, referring the reader to the Taxæ in the Bullarium as "the genuine Taxæ," might have occasioned surprise, if any thing in modern Papal tactics could. The things themselves are the most inpocuous in all directions that can be imagined. I had expressly guarded against them as a common fallacy in my Venality, p.5, and hardly expected that any champion of Rome had forehead enough to attempt to palm them upon the public as the genuine, and only, or principal Taxæ of the Roman see. They are, except for the cupidity which characterises them, perfectly innocent matters, and have no appearance of being intended for deception, presenting, however, strong temptation in such times as the present to those who have an interest in so employing them. It is rather unfortunate that, when I had done my best to warn the public, particularly Romanists, of the danger, Mr. G. should spontaneously step into the not very honourable niche which I had
