of the Boot inflicted on the wretched enthusiasts whom persecution had driven to resistance.  After his accession, almost his first act was to obtain from the servile parliament of Scotland a law for inflicting death on preachers at conventicles held within houses, and on both preachers and hearers at conventicles held in the open air.  All this he had done, for a religion which was not his own.  All this he had done, not in defence of truth against error, but in defence of one damnable error against another, in defence of the Episcopalian against the Presbyterian apostasy.  Lewis the Fourteenth is justly censured for trying to dragoon his subjects to heaven.  But it was reserved for James to torture and murder for the difference between two roads to hell.  And this man, so deeply imbued with the poison of intolerance that, rather than not persecute at all, he would persecute people out of one heresy into another, this man is held up as the champion of religious liberty.  This man, who persecuted in the cause of the unclean panther, would not, we are told, have persecuted for the sake of the milk-white and immortal hind.

And what was the conduct of James at the very time when he was professing zeal for the rights of conscience?  Was he not even then persecuting to the very best of his power?  Was he not employing all his legal prerogatives, and many prerogatives which were not legal, for the purpose of forcing his subjects to conform to his creed?  While he pretended to abhor the laws which excluded Dissenters from office, was he not himself dismissing from office his ablest, his most experienced, his most faithful servants, on account of their religious opinions?  For what offence was Lord Rochester driven from the Treasury?  He was closely connected with the Royal House.  He was at the head of the Tory party.  He had stood firmly by James in the most trying emergencies.  But he would not change his religion, and he was dismissed.  That we may not be suspected of overstating the case, Dr. Lingard, a very competent, and assuredly not a very willing witness, shall speak for us.  “The King,” says that able but partial writer, “was disappointed.  He complained to Barillon of the obstinacy and insincerity of the treasurer; and the latter received from the French envoy a very intelligible hint that the loss of office would result from his adhesion to his religious creed.  He was, however, inflexible; and James, after a long delay, communicated to him, but with considerable embarrassment and many tears, his final determination.  He had hoped, he said, that Rochester, by conforming to the Church of Rome, would have spared him the unpleasant task; but kings must sacrifice their feelings to their duty.”  And this was the King who wished to have all men of all sects rendered alike capable of holding office.  These proceedings were alone sufficient to take away all credit from his liberal professions; and such, as we learn from the despatches of the Papal Nuncio,