You will not suppose because my letters follow each other so fast at this time, that I am about to become a habitual nuisance, & that a correspondence with me is to be one of the disagreables attached to your Editorship.

– But both my own concerns & yours require that I should write just now.

You will see Turner,

– tho he recommends a course which I shall not follow, that of proceeding by information,

& involving myself in expence & trouble, for the purpose of giving a solemn denial to charges which most certainly are not believed by the very miscreant himself who has made them. He wishes to avoid any appearance of an attack on my part upon the Press, & the Morning Chronicle, whereas it appears to me that if I have an opportunity of bringing that paper to justice punishing that newspaper for its abuse of the press, I ought just as much to do it in this case, as I would bring a fellow to justice for assaulting me on the highway. Allowing them as large a latitude as they desire for political abuse, I would rest solely upon the charge of impious & blasphemous obscenities.

That charge must be founded upon the Extracts in the Omniana. Vol I. p. 123.

with regard to the baptism of children before they are born, I cannot remember that I have ever mentioned it (tho very likely I may, as one of the abominations to which Catholic superstition leads) – except in a very curious passage from Feyjoo, which is given in the Annual Review. Vol I. p. 562.

My brother has both that & the Omniana. So many things are possible in law, that it must be only a lawyer who can determine whether there be any thing in those two passages, upon which a justification for this devilish libel can be set up. Should it appear as clear in law as it is in equity that this <it> is a foul & infamous libel, which any Judge & any Jury must pronounce such, then certainly I would bring an action for damages against the Morning Chronicle, without caring who the author may be: that paper having not only inserted it, but called attention to it in its leading paragraph.

The rest may be thrown overboard. Let them revile me as an author & a politician till their hearts ache.

Their obloquy serves only to show that my opinions have an influence in society, which they know & feel. And if it gives me any feeling, it is that of satisfaction at seeing to what base & unmanly practises they are obliged to descend. But this goes beyond all bounds of political or even personal animosity. There can be no villainy of which a man would not be capable, who is capable of bringing forward such charges upon such grounds. True it is that my character needs no vindication, & I would not lift a finger to vindicate it. But if I have a villain by the throat, I would deliver him over to justice. Nevertheless if you & Turner agree in opinion that I had better let the matter alone, I shall without hesitation follow the advice. And it is well to bear in mind that there has more than once been manifested a xxxx <most> reprehensible disposition in the Judges to favour the wrong side, lest they should be suspected of leaning toward the right.

Now to the business of the Review. I have laid aside Bayard according to your wish, & begun with the Ch. Miss. Society.

The change may occasion a weeks delay, but you shall have the paper in time. In this paper my purpose is to treat the subject of missions in general, & give a general view of what the Ch: of England in particular has done & is doing in this way. Therefore I shall be glad of some Reports of the Soc. for propagating the Gospel; – & also of those of the Home Missionary Society, – upon which I am inclined to lay a heavy hand.

– I care not what Travels you send me, – having abundant notes & references for any part of the habitable earth. Mexico might tempt me into too wide a field, – for if Murray had sent me Bullocks book

I had thought of preparing an important paper upon the former civilization of that country. Perhaps the account of Portugal which he just now advertises

will be a subject that I can treat with more expedition than any other – I would not think of Lord J Russells book,

or the Annuaire,

because there are large subjects enough before me – to wit Bayard (which I shall dress up well) – Baxter,

& (which I forgot to mention in my last) the forthcoming edition of Sir T. Browns works,

& the Pepys Memoirs.

Hughes (of Oriel)

was preparing a paper upon American Literature – in a right spirit. He had begun with Geoffrey Crayon – of whom quite enough has been said, & who may be left quietly to sink to his own level: but the general this paper it is not unlikely you may have had transferred to you; – but the general subject is a good one, & I can help Hughes in the course of an hour or so, to some serviceable notices for it, from my stock of American books. – Murray should apply to Barron Field for a paper about New Holland & Van Diemens Land;

– but let him leave New Zealand for me & the Church Missionaries.

Concerning the Catholic Question

you doubt whether conceding it will really weaken or strengthen us for the struggle which is sure to follow the concession; – & whether there is any hope of ultimately resisting the present demand. It is this latter <view> which leads many good men at this time to take the wrong side, – Wilberforce for example & Sir T Acland. They both think that because too much has been granted, more must be given. I differ from them most decidedly – in the belief that if the cession be prevented a few years longer, the Catholic Religion will show itself so plainly in its true colours every where, that the broad distinction between Protestants & Papists will place us in perfect safety. But to the first question I answer without any hesitation that the concession would most materially endanger the Church of England. An object which all the enemies of that Church are united in seeking, must be injurious to it. The Dissenters – the Whigs – the Liberals – what care they for the Catholics? they have their own views to serve by aiding them in this question. The immediate consequence of the concession would be – the repeal of the Test Act,

– in go the Dissenters into the Corporations, – & in come their members into Parliament. The Tithes & the Church property <then> become the objects of attack, – & I know not to what extent the evil may not be carried. – By the by you will see ere long a collection of all that has been said against the Church in Parliament during the last session, – put together by a clergyman – a friend of D^r Wordsworth’s; – that it may clearly be seen what the enemies of the Church are aiming at.

The number of Catholic members who would immediately be returned to Parliament would not be inconsiderable. They would not dream at once of bringing about the reestablishment of their Church; – but they fully expect it sooner or later; their numbers in England have increased seven fold within the last thirty years (so it is stated) – & they known that whatever weakens the Establishment tends surely to strengthen them. For the spirit of Popery is a stronger spirit than that either of Puritanism or of Infidelity, another consequence is that the King must be allowed the same liberty of conscience as his subjects, & the same liberty of marrying a Roman Catholic if he chuses, – tho we know what that liberty has cost us.

My principle is the plain one, that no persons ought to be trusted with political power who think it their duty to alter the constitution of the Church. The argument which Elmsley used in a letter to me some months ago is wholly fallacious – that we ought to do as is done in Russia & Austria with other modes of faith.

There is no similarity in the cases. There are no legislative assemblies there. What is demanded here is not employment in the state, but legislative power, – legislative power for men who teach that salvation is not to be obtained out of the pale of their own Church, – for whom persecution is strictly a religious duty, – & who yet <claim> to be admitted into power as a right due to them upon the principle of toleration.

This is a subject upon which I enter in my Colloquies,

– where also it is that I think of examining the popular xxxxxxx grounds of unbelief. – The account of Struensee

I have not seen, – nor Davisons work,

– but am glad to hear of both – & shall be interested by them.

I will prepare a short paper upon poor D^r Sayers’ works.

He has a claim to it – as an old contributor to the Review, – & from me especially, who <have> followed his example of irregular blank verse so largely.