and of the extraordinary and unceasing caution he has been obliged to exercise, in searching for such literary treasures as may yet lie buried among this degraded people.

His researches, in the present instance, have been crowned with a success of which he himself, as well as his friends, had utterly despaired. The celebrated Golius was sent with the Dutch ambassador to the court of Morocco in 1622, and he is recorded to have collected many Arabic MSS. then unknown in Europe. With this exception, every other scholar in oriental literature who has ever attempted to acquire Arabic MSS. in any part of Barbary, has had to lament a mortifying failure until now, and more especially in their attempts in obtaining the large work of Ebn Batoota, which has ever formed the especial object of their researches. Not only several learned oriental scholars, but many active agents of Christian states, have instituted eager research through all Barbary after that particular work, but more especially about forty years ago, when the attention of the literary world was recalled by Sir William Jones to the pursuits of oriental learning.

There is one point to which all those of the British public who feel a concern for the reputation or the national interest of their country, should be especially directed on the present occasion. Our consular and vice-consular agents in Barbary, and the East in general, are frequently called upon to perform duties of a difficult as well as delicate nature, sometimes involving the dignity as much as the nearest interests of the empire, in written correspondence or personal communication with the ministers of those powers to whom they are deputed. It is therefore obvious that public officers placed in such situations, should possess a knowledge of the language of the country. But what is the melancholy truth? That not one scarcely of our foreign agents knows a solitary word of the language of the court to which they are sent. And what are the consequences? Negotiations demanding dignity and energy of expression, delicacy of tact, and profound secrecy, are entrusted to Jews and foreigners, who sometimes are mercenary and venal, always most fearful of Mohammedan authority. Hence many of our plans have been defeated, because the Jewish interpreter either weakened the energy, or entirely altered the sense, of our agents' communications, through the fear of the punishment which might fall upon him, were he, a foreigner, to give utterance to the energetic declaration of a British consul; or to gain his own particular ends, or for the sake of a good bribe, helped to impede the advancement of the negociation of his own employer. It is time, therefore, that England should employ on her foreign missions only such as understand the language of the country. We have a fearful interest at present in the Levant. Russia is looking to that quarter with an eager eye. Other powers are anxious to undermine British influence; and our national interests at all times, and under all circumstances, are never in better hands and more secure keeping than in those of our own countrymen. Let us hope, therefore, that the English government will invariably reward the diligence and labours of such young men of talent and industry as Mr. John Hay, by giving them the preference in all the foreign appointments which become

vacant. The East India Government has afforded the nation a useful lesson on this subject, as it requires all its civil servants to know the language of the country.

"GERALDINE; A TALE OF CONSCIENCE."-A work of a highly controversial character, under this title, will appear in a few days. It is the production of a lady of great acquirements, who has recently become a convert to the Catholic faith, and who is nearly related to a well-known religious Baronet. "GERALDINE" may be regarded as an exposé of the motives which induced the amiable and accomplished authoress to enter the bosom of the infallible Church. The work, from the able manner in which the subject is handled, and the rank of the writer, is likely to produce a sensation in the religious world.

DR. WISEMAN AND THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS AT ROME.-Rome, Feb. 4. Yesterday, the 3rd instant, his Holiness paid a visit to the English College. He arrived at ten o'clock, with a numerous retinue; and was received at the door by his Eminence Cardinal Weld; the Right Rev. Dr. Macdonnell, Catholic Bishop of Trinidad; the Very Rev. Dr. Wiseman, the Rector; and other members of the establishment.

After visiting the Chapel, his Holiness ascended the stairs to a spacious apartment, where a throne had been erected, and there, in a manner the most affable, received the students and officers of the house. After inspecting the greater part of the College, his Holiness proceeded to the library, where an elegant collation had been prepared, of which he partook with the prelates of his suite. Cardinal Weld availed himself of the occasion to deliver to the Pope, on the part of the Catholics of London, a copy of the medal which was presented to Dr. Wiseman during his stay in England, in token of the high estimation in which his services in the cause of learning and religion were held. His Holiness requested to see the original medal, which had been beautifully executed by Mr. Clint. After attentively examining the medal, and the workmanship of the enamelled chain to which it was attached, and which his Holiness considered as favourable specimens of English art, the Pope placed them round the neck of Dr. Wiseman, with many expressions of kindness. After remaining an hour and a half, the Pope returned to his carriage, amidst the acclamations of a large crowd, which his presence had attracted. His Holiness again and again expressed his gratification at all he had seen, and the deep interest which he took in the welfare of this ancient establishment; and was assured, in return, that his kindness on the present occasion would be considered by all the English Catholics as a mark of his paternal feelings in their regard.

Supplementary Note to the Article in No. III. upon the "Persecution of Catholics in Prussia."

It is not usual for quarterly publications to enter into controversiesneither do we intend easily to depart from this rule. But when, at so early a period of our existence, the accuracy of our statements has been called in question, especially after having been copied into respectable papers, we feel it a duty to come forward in self-justification.

We were fully aware that most of our disclosures would be considered startling, and be unexpected. Prussia had long been held up as a "model state" in regard to toleration, and its policy towards the Catholics had been too wily for it easily to be detected, or for its admirers easily to give up their feelings in its favour. The Catholics have no means of raising their voices in self-defence, for the press is strictly under a government censure. An example of this hardship has occurred since our article was written. On the 30th of December last, the Gazette of Aixla-Chapelle published an article on China, in which all the Catholic missionaries, whose accounts have been fully verified by every subsequent research, were treated as bigots and suspected writers; and Gutzloff, the Prussian Bible Society's missionary, declared the only man worthy of credit upon that country. The censor, Ludermann, of course, sanctioned the publication of this sweeping and atrocious calumny. Mr. Brender wrote an answer; but it was only inserted with a commentary by the editor. Mr. Nellisen then wrote a second reply, and took the precaution of sending his article to another paper. But the same censor, Ludermann, of course, refused the imprimatur! Mr. Nellisen remonstrated, and threatened to lodge a complaint against Mr. Ludermann; and, at last, his answer, completely mutilated, was allowed to appear. If, then, such obstacles are thrown in the way of Catholics, and such partialities are shewn, in controversies purely historico-religious, what may we expect in politico-religious matters? How is it possible that the Catholics can make themselves heard, or appeal to Europe against the treatment they experience? So strict is the surveillance on this head, that any paper out of the kingdom, which takes their part, and exposes the artful policy of the Berlin cabinet, is sure to be interdicted. The " Univers," an upright, fearless, and able Catholic French paper, has been most zealous in this task; and we have rejoiced to see its views in accordance with our own, though no communication had taken place between us on the subject. The consequence has been its announcement, on the 17th of March, that all its numbers have been sent back from the Prussian frontier, with these words stamped in red upon the address, "Prohibé en Prusse." The " Journal Historique" of Liége, which has generously undertaken the same cause, has, we suppose, undergone, or will undergo, the same fate. We consider it, then, an act of generosity, or rather of justice, to lend our aid to those who, under oppression, are compelled to be silent. Not so the Prussian authorities. They have papers at their devotion in every part of the Continent; the gazettes of Frankfort, Hamburgh, the Hague, and other places, are their organs. Some of our

VOL. II.-NO. IV.

2 s

readers may remember an interesting letter inserted in the Chronicle in the course of last summer, complaining, in the name of the Prussian Catholics, of the system under which they lived, and of the erroneous impressions existing in England concerning their state. This communication was immediately attacked at great length by the Hague Journal, and soon after, this reply was abridged in the Frankfort paper, under the head of Berlin, 22nd August, 1836. We were not, therefore, surprised that, on the appearance of out article, a running fire should have commenced along the line of outposts to Prussian intolerance, especially after the notice taken of it by the daily press. The Standard and other papers copied their reply; and we proceed to notice it, as given in the Hamburgh Gazette of January 20. After the same general observations on the "misrepresentation of facts," as had been made in the Chronicle of last year, the writer comes to proofs. Never, in our idea, could the objection be granted to its full extent, with less danger to the assertion, than in this case. The article in the Review embraced a great variety of points, public and domestic; education, marriages, places of worship, employments, religious practices, proselytism, and many others. Upon most of these heads it quoted, as the Chronicle has observed, chapter and verse; it referred to orders of the day, and royal decrees, official instructions, and public documents. No attempt has been made to disprove the accuracy of the references, or the validity of the consequences drawn from them. On all these various and important topics, except one, no confutation is pretended, farther than telling us, that at " Berlin persons but superficially acquainted with the subject, must laugh at our ignorance." True, they will be precisely the persons superficially acquainted with the subject that will laugh; those who know it thoroughly will be more inclined to sigh at our facts. But what wonder if at Berlin," men should laugh? The important question, in cases of hardship is, not whether he who inflicts, but rather whether he who suffers can laugh? If our article have reached the banks of the Rhine, and we shall learn that there we have been laughed at for our ignorance of the happy state of tolerant liberty enjoyed by the Catholics, we shall rejoice from our hearts, and make honourable apology for the error into which the documents issued by the Prussian government have led us-though we should then condemn them as unintelligible. But so long as we know that by them our statements are approved, we care not for the laugh of Berlin. We remember, since our boyhood, the sensible answer put into a frog's mouth by Sir Roger Lestrange, as addressed to boys who found it a laughing matter to throw stones at it—" This may be sport to you, but is death to us."

The only point on which an attempt is made to contradict our statements, is in regard to the admission of Catholics to public employments, military and diplomatic only. For even, on this head, we had spoken of a multifarious exclusion. The first of these two contested matters is proved, by a reference to the army list, which "will show the names of the best known Catholic families in all ranks in the army." It is then added, that " the late Field Marshal Gneisenau was a Catholic." The weakness of this exception, according to an old canon of school-logic,

confirms the rule. When it has been said, that the Dublin or other Irish corporations are, or were, exclusively Protestant, no one ever considered the assertion weakened by one or two extraordinary exceptions in favour of Catholics being admitted to them. It is not stated in reply to us, that there is actually any Catholic field marshal, or other officer in high command, but that sometime ago there was ONE! If living examples could have been produced, surely they would have been preferred. Now, be it remembered, that we spoke of the exclusive system of Prussia as a growing system, and as one which has lately taken its present form. That some time ago there was one superior officer a Catholic, and now there is none, surely confirms this our view. In the same manner, we cannot doubt, but officers who have served their time in the army have retained their ranks. But we showed how, at present, it is necessary for any one who aspires to military promotion to serve many years, and during this time to attend Protestant worship, and in a great measure to abstain from his own, if a Catholic; and this regulation certainly tends to keep conscientious Catholics from all chance of promotion. We should wish to abstain from all personal remarks, but we fear we are correct in observing, that the late Marshal Gneisenau, though a Catholic, brought up his family in the Protestant religion; and this sort of Catholics are pretty sure of patronage at Berlin,* though we must disclaim them as exceptions in our favour.

The same remarks as we have made respecting the army will apply to diplomacy. With Prince Von Hatzfield, and Prince Von Mettitz, we have no business at present; they are, and can only be, brought as examples, that Catholics have been employed as ambassadors. The living exceptions are three :-1st, Count Von Schaffyotsch, "ambassador at Florence," as the paper calls him. Here is an incorrect assertion. There is no Prussian ambassador at that city, the gentleman mentioned is only a chargé-d'affaires, and that in subordination to the minister of Turin, to whom we believe he is councillor of legation. The other two are the chargés-d'affaires at Darmstadt and the ambassador to Greece. We are willing to allow these two, reserving the point for examination, whether Count Lusi be an ambassador in truth, or only like the one at Florence. To what does it after all amount? That two or three thirdrate situations, not of ambassadors, or ministers, but of chargés-d'affaires, an office held often by the secretary of legation, have been conferred upon Catholics; though we are still without proof as to the time of their promotions. The ambassador of Greece, if an exception, is a solitary case, out of the many diplomatic agents employed by Prussia.

But against this set the exclusion of Catholics from every other situation, and take into account the relative numbers of the population professing the two religions, and see if any thing like proportion of patronage is kept. We were far from exhausting our materials in our last paper; we left plenty to say; and have since learnt new instances to confirm our assertions. As a set-off to what has been stated against us, we will give a fresh case. Mr. Fahlkamp, chief president in Munster,

* We have been assured that the marshal was not known to be a Catholic till the close of his life.