tinction is made between orders civil, military, or religious.. It is impossible, however, that this doctrine can be intended to be laid down in so broad and sweeping a manner. Doubtless, it is the duty of every good subject, and more especially of every Christian, to yield implicit obedience to the laws of his country. He will be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake," and he will not be found among " those who are given to change." It is still more absolutely the duty of a soldier to yield obedience to his lawful superiors. But, whether he be a soldier, or whether he be a civilian, the Christian will remember, that it is his duty in the first place to fear God and obey his laws. And if, unhappily, any human order should come in collision with his duty to God, he will give to the winds his allegiance to his sovereign, without stopping to inquire whether or not the order be issued by an authority legally constituted. If it be unlawful in itself, no adventitious circumstance, no fancied responsibility of others, can possibly render it lawful. For example, God has said, "Thou shalt not worship graven images.' But a legally constituted authority also says, " At what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye shall fall down and worship the image which I have made." Shall this order, be obeyed because we, are bound to be loyal and good subjects, and because it might, be said that our disobedience 'would establish a doctrine ⚫ irreconcileable with the security and interests of the country, ' and therefore! equally at variance with the true principles of the Christian religion?"

Again, let the principle be applied exclusively to the army. The articles of war require obedience to every lawful order." But it is clear, that this supposes that an unlawful order' might be given by a legally constituted authority;' and for obedience to certain unlawful orders, a soldier might forfeit his life. We admit, that it is dangerous to reason from extreme cases, such as that under review; but still, we hold it to be unquestionable, that circumstances may occasionally arise, as they did at Malta, in which disobedience becomes a duty, and obedience a crime.

The only other position on which we are disposed to comment, is contained in the following paragraph, in which a defence is made of the order, for disobeying which, Captain Atchison and Mr. Dawson were cashiered.

The orders issued upon this occasion, resulted from general and local considerations closely connected with the interests of the empire at large, and affecting generally the maintenance of peace and harmony in the government of Malta and the tranquillity thereof.

That an act of courtesy, observed from these considerations in a colony in which the profession of the Roman Catholic faith is acknowledged and sanctioned by the British Government, an act strictly consistent with the respect which has been customarily paid by his majesty's troops to the catholic ceremonies in catholic countries, cannot be viewed as rendering the superior officer, still less the executive officer, a party to worship not recognized by the established religion of the mother country. The attention shewn to the feelings, habits, and prejudices of a loyal and well-disposed population, subjects of liis majesty, professing a different creed, is, in fact, a civil act prescribed by the policy and general interest of the state, which those intrusted with public duties are bound to support.'

Our readers will, we apprehend, be not a little astonished at the language of this quotation, should they be unacquainted with the facts detailed in the appendix to this trial. In this appendix are contained official documents, in one instance requiring the attendance of the troops in Malta, with band, king's colours, &c., in the cathedral church, in mourning, To

ASSIST AT THE SOLEMN SACRIFICE OF MANY MASSES FOR THE RELIEF OF THE SOUL OF THE LATE POPE FROM PUR

GATORY! (pp. 119, 20.) From other documents it appears, that, at CORFU, the military and civil officers of the crown, along with the Greek priesthood, are required to join in a pro cession in honour of St. Spiridione!! On such occasions,' says Mr. Dawson,

⚫ the bones of the saint are borne under a canopy, British field-officers supporting the same over those relics, and the remainder of the officers following in train, lighted candles being carried by those to whom the priests think proper to distribute them. Cripples throw themselves in the way for cure; and miracles are supposed to be effected during the procession to the church, both there and in the remainder of the Ionian islands; each of which has its patron who receives similar honours.' pp. 115 and 121.

After this, our readers will not be surprised to learn, that these abominations are not confined to the Mediterranean, but extend also to the Mauritius, where the mass and other 'solemnities of the Romish religion are assisted by guards of ⚫ honour and salutes of cannon from the military.'*

If these be the modern principles of toleration,-if such concessions be necessary to the practice of liberality.-if these be 'civil acts prescribed by the policy and general interests of the state,'-well may we apply the remarks of Gibbon, in re

* Memoranda respecting the State of Slavery, &c. in the Mauritius. 8vo. (Butterworth.)

gard to Pagan toleration, to the history of our own country in the present age. 'The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people as equally true, by the philosopher as equally false, and by the magistrate as equally useful. The devout Polytheist, though fondly attached to his national rites, admitted, with implicit 'faith, the different religions of the earth. The thin texture of Pagan mythology was interwoven with various, but not • discordant materials. The deities of a thousand groves and a thousand streams, possessed in peace their local and respective influence. Nor could the Roman, who deprecated the wrath of the Tiber, deride the Egyptian, who presented his offering to the beneficent genius of the Nile.'

We are indeed filled with horror at the thought, that so total a dereliction of religious principle should be sanctioned and encouraged in the army. If it be necessary for the welfare of the empire, that British soldiers should prostrate themselves before Popish images, or follow in procession the bones of saints with lighted tapers in their hands,-why may we not also expect to find that it is deemed necessary, that they should also do homage to the prejudices of the peaceful Hindoo or haughty Mussulman? Why may not we also see British troops, stifling the voice of conscience, renouncing the principles of their faith, and degrading their character, prostrate themselves before Juggernaut, or profess the creed of the Koran? It is an abuse which calls loudly for redress; and every Englishman is bound to do his utmost to wipe off the foul stain from the character of his country.

We are not advocating intolerance; we have ever been the warm and steady friends of complete, unequivocal, and substantial toleration. But there is a wide difference between toleration and indifference,-between the protection which ought to be extended to every individual in the observance of his religious rites, and the latitudinarian principle which would cause a man to be indifferent whether he addressed his Maker as Jehovah, Jove, or Lord.' Let Romanists retain at home, as well as in our colonies, the pompous pageantry and glittering paraphernalia of their public processions; let them parade their images in gaudy costume to the sound of sacred music, amidst the chaunting of monks, priests, friars, and other votaries of the mystical Babylon ;-let them possess unmolested their canopies, their incense, their banners, to rivet the attention of the crowd, and chain the senses of deluded devotees their errors are to be combated with other weapons than those of compulsion or than penal statutes. Let them at all times find in celebrating their public worship, that protection to

which they have a just claim. But surely, there is a limit beyond which we cannot pass with safety. Are we to surrender our own principles, and thus help to rivet more firmly the chains of Popery, by bringing Protestantism and pure religion into contempt? Can this be essential to the welfare of the empire? And shall Protestant officers, men of unblemished character and strict principle, be frowned upon and driven out of the army, because they will not sacrifice their conscience, and relinquish their religion, in support of the vain attempt to fortify our interests by flattering the Roman Catholic?

In examining the case of Captain Atchison and Mr. Dawson, we have been forcibly reminded of the story of Marcellus the centurion, as related by Milner. It seems that the Emperor Diocletian had introduced new military laws, and ordered soldiers to join in sacrifices to the gods. It was in the year 298,' says this excellent historian, at Tangier in Mauritania, while every one was employed in feasting and sacrifices, that Marcellus the centurion took off his belt, threw down his vine-branch and arms, and added: "I will not fight any longer under the banner of your Emperor, or serve your gods of wood and stone. If the condition of a soldier be such that he is obliged to sacrifice to gods and emperors, I abandon the vine-branch and the belt, and quit the service." "We plainly see the cause," says Fleury, "that ⚫ forced Christians to desert: they were compelled to partake of idolatrous worship." The centurion was ordered to be ⚫ beheaded, and Cassianus, the Register, whose business it was to take down the sentence, cried out aloud that he was 'shocked at its injustice. Marcellus smiled for joy, foreseeing that Cassianus would be his fellow-martyr. In fact, he was actually martyred a month after.**

We doubt not, that in the days of Marcellus, there were lukewarm Christians who agreed with his tyrannical oppressors in thinking that he was guilty of imprudence, and that with a safe conscience he might have obeyed the lawful ⚫ order of the constituted authorities.' And we know that there were not wanting in that age, any more than in our own, courtly sycophants and profane infidelst, to misrepresent his motives and ridicule his conduct. But his name is enrolled among the noble army of the martyrs of Jesus, and will be holden in everlasting remembrance, while that of his persecutors shall rot in oblivion, or live in the detestation of mankind. To Captain Atchison and Lieutenant Dawson, has been given

the glorious distinction reserved for few in these days of ease and expediency, "in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe "in him, but also to suffer for his sake." Their professional hopes have been blasted, they have been deprived of all their worldly dependence, and it may be thought by some, that they have been degraded. But degraded they cannot be, till all the glorious martyrs and confessors of Christ are also held to have been degraded ;-till those who have despoiled them of their wealth, and stripped them of their military honours, shall also be able to bereave them of the calm sunshine of the soul, -to deprive them of that peace which the world can neither give nor take away,-to tear from them hope, and stamp shame upon their brow. Their self-denial and undaunted firmness in the midst of threats and persecutions,-the derision* of the ungodly, the entreaties of their friends, and above all, the opposition of mistaken or lukewarm Christians,-are far above all praise of ours. Nor is it possible to calculate the benefit which has been produced by their example. Already has it occasioned the silent abolition of the practice which was thought necessary for the welfare of the empire, and for disobeying which they were dismissed. But the influence of this bright example shall extend not merely to the present, but to future ages, and, like that of the martyred Marcellus, serve to cheer and animate in his course the Christian soldier who is at any time required to sacrifice the rights of conscience, and compromise his duty to his God. In the possession of so many sources of consolation, we might be disposed to view Captain Atchison and Lieutenant Dawson as objects of our envy and admiration, rather than of our pity. But still, there is a duty which their fellow Christians at home owe, not merely to these officers, but to the cause in which they suffered. We are bound to take care that, so far as pecuniary compensation can alleviate the injury they have sustained, they shall not suffer through our default;-and we are happy to see that steps have been taken for the purpose of raising a subscription for their benefit, and to rescue them from the state of destitution in which they are placed. To the honour of the Church of England be it spoken, one of its most illustrious prelatest has been the first to head the subscription with a donation of one hundred pounds. We feel confident that the tried friends of

* It was often repeated as a bon mot at Malta, as well before as after the trial, that if a man chose to serve his God instead of serving his country, he must take the consequences.'

The Archbishop of Tuam.