ex

́titute of talent as not to be able | paragraphs; now you can to speak upon such a subject claim "bail in such a case!" without being guilty of grossness Now, that you have done all that too offensive to be endured by the you can do for him by your sipublic, did that prevent you from lence, now you have seen the cat speaking of the bail? Hypocrisy jump away, and have too, seen may serve you elsewhere; but it which way public opinion jumps, cannot serve you here. There is and having, besides, felt, in your nothing indelicate in the word bail! sale (where alone you have feelWhen you were speaking of the ing) now you can begin to join Vere-street Gang, who were com- in; and in a few days, we should paratively poor devils, and poor not wonder to see you beginning devils are always your aversion; some foul-mouthed attack upon poverty is always sin enough of those whom you will choose to itself in your eyes; when you deem guilty of suffering this eswere speaking of the Vere-street cape. We beg the public to Gang, you very justly, indeed, but watch you, upon this occasion. most vehemently, and without the You do not well know what to do, smallest delicacy in the world, but your workings will be matter gave narratives of the transac-of great curiosity at any rate. tions; but if you be grown delicate all at once, and if that delicacy is of such a strange complexion that it blushes when you have to speak of the conduct of a for which you are so famous; Bishop, and is hardened as brass but, it weighs not a feather in when you have to speak of what wiping off the disgrace of three you call the seditious conduct of days' silence with regard to such Mrs. CARLILE and her sister, for not tearing whom out of their houses you blamed the Government; if your delicacy be of this strange complexion, what had delicacy to do with the bail?-Now that the wretch has fled; now that your publications can do him no harm; now that he laughs at your

As to your concluding remark, about the disgrace brought upon the Church of God, it belongs to that species of blasphemous cant,

a transaction. The effect of this silence you have already felt, to our certain knowledge; and the further effects are to come.

If it be true that the Bishop; that the Right Reverend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of Clogher is gone out of the kingdom never to return, as asserted in this

vile old paper, which appears | Church of England were informed to know a great deal more against for non-residence in 1799. about the matter of going away Actions were brought against them than we do if this be true, agreeably to the 21st (we think it what is to become of the Bishop-was) of Henry VIII. Now mind, ric? Is the Bishop still to receive here were legal proceedings the immense revenues of that against many Clergymen of the Bishopric which have been stated Church.----The law was clear. at thirteen thousand pounds a-There was no quirk that could save year, and which are probably them. There was no law existing much more? Is there to be no that would admit of an interpretaBishop to supply his place? Is tion in their favour. Then came he to have a deputy? It would (pull your hats off, readers!) then be deemed blasphemous to say came the Parliament and passed that Bishops are of no use; it a law to save them by quashing would be deemed revolutionary the informations against them; by and treasonable. We must not, putting an end to those legal protherefore, say that; and yet it ceedings, and suffering the spiwould be hard to say what use a ritual persons to go free. Bishop is to be of, if he can live out of the country all his lifetime.

Now, if this could be done by Act of Parliament; if the Parliament could interfere, and in so ef

We know not, however, of any fectual a manner here, to set aside law, by which a man may be un-one of the most important provibishoped, or have his revenues sions in that code which gave the taken from him. We do know, Church its property; if it could however, that a law can be made do this, can it not interfere now? to do it, and for the honour of the Or are we to be told that it can country we do hope that the Par-never interfere with laws relative liament will not separate without to the Church, except for the taking this matter up. We are pose of protecting those Members not to be told, that the Parliament of that Church, who have been cannot interfere in legal proceed-guilty of a breach of the laws? ings already commenced. We However, WE SHALL SEE; have a case; a case in point as to for, as we have said from the beevery thing but the nature of the ginning, the THING is now upon Act. Scores of clergymen of the its trial!

pur

1

* JOHN WALTER

AND DR. O'MEARA.

[From the same]-Thursday.

we must confess, to call the Doctor a liar, when it acknowledged, itself, that no other paper could have been meant, when a Bourbon bribe of three thousand pounds was talked of. But how the Doctor came to know that JoHN had any thing to do with the matter seems strange to us, seeing that we believe that the name of two women are down at the Stampoffice as principal proprietors of the paper. This was the case, we know, only 18 months back, and we see no reason to suppose that it is not the case now. Why then, should the Doctor fall upon poor JOHN? If we were in JOHN's place, and had JOHN's feelings about us, we would not stay banished, as it were, forty miles from London. Men may say what they will in the way of ridiculing petticoat government. JOHN finds it a very good thing, we dare say; for it gives that which many other Governments take care not to give, and do not seem to be made for at all; namely, shelter! And, if we were JOHN WALTER, We would not give it out that we were forty miles from London and sink the

We have heard that the Mr. WILLIAM WALTER, whom the Chronicle said was so handsomely flogged by Dr. O'MEARA, is the brother of JOHN of the Times. The Chronicle told us, that it had authority to say, that this WILLIAM Walter had nothing to do, either directly or indirectly with the Old Times newspaper. If this be true, we are sorry that he got the flogging, for two reasons, first, because he did not deserve it; and second, because, in all human probability, he will have kept it from the back of the man that deserved it. The Old Times of yesterday tells us that JOHN is 40 miles from London; but it is careful not to name the place! We dare say that if he be near the turnpike-road, he keeps a sharp look out! With a little alteration, JOHN may now say with MACBETH: " How is it name of the place; we would "with me, when the crack of actually and literally take shelter 66 every coachman and carter's

"whip alarms me!"---It was a little too impudent in the Times,

under the petticoats, and let the Doctor flog away if he dared, the cowardly dog!

GENTLEMEN,

WM. COBBETT.

Kensington, July 22, 1822.

I RECEIVED on Thursday, your obliging invitation to the Dinner above-mentioned. I had, without any invitation, signified in the last TO-DAY I have a letter from Register, my intention to attend. you, informing me, that you had Your invitation was followed, yes- (before the arrival of my last Reterday, by a most obliging offer, gister) placarded the walls with a on the part of one of you, of lodg-notice that I should attend at the ing and other accommodations at Dinner to be given to Mr. Wooler; Birmingham. But notwithstand-that my non-attendance would ocing these additional inducements, casion great disappointment; that and though I had notified, in a many persons have taken Tickets, part of the Register, printed off as you believe, with the impresearly yesterday, my thankful ac- sion that they should meet me; ceptance of the honour you had that the effervescence of expectadone me, I found, from intelli- tion is so great, that you fear disgence received by yesterday's post, advantageous consequences from that it would be impossible for me the disappointment; and that, to attend on the 29th, without such if I do not attend, the Cominconvenience as I could not have mittee will be exposed to blame put myself to without ascribing to for having, in the placards, asmy presence at the Dinner a de- serted, in so positive a manner, gree of importance that it did that I should attend. not deserve. I regret this on my As to the motives of the Comown account; for I should have mittee, I, of course, can know had singular pleasure in being, nothing of them; but, while I

should greatly lament disappoint- you very much overrate, seeing

ing any of the worthy people of Birmingham, you will, I am sure, do me the justice to say, that the placarding was done without my consent or knowledge, and that you never possessed any notification from me of my intention to attend on the 29th.

that it would give me great pain to be, though blamelessly, the cause of disappointing any one single man of the public-spirited labouring classes o^ Birmingham, whose friendship is so highly valued by me.

Nevertheless, the notification of my intention to attend having been placarded, though without any knowledge of mine, and it being my most anxious desire to prevent whatever inconvenience may be likely to arise from the disappointment, which you (groundlessly I hope) appear to apprehend, I shall, by to-morrow's coach, send to you copies of this letter, which, in justice to me as

I heard of the Dinner at first by accident; I then sent to Mr. Wooler's office to ascertain the day; I was informed that it was the 26th; I received no invitation till last Thursday, four days after my notification had reached Birmingham. It was, however, still my intention to attend, but, a letter by Friday's post informed me that I could not do this on the 29th, without extreme inconve-well as to the public, I trust you nience; and, thereupon I gave up will be so good as to cause to be the design, my mortification at posted up in the same way as the doing which being considerably notification was posted. diminished by perceiving, that, in your public advertisement and hand-bill, you had, in naming the persons invited, confined yourselves to Thomas Northmore, Esq. Major Cartwright, and the Rev. Henry Cresswell." This, at once, relieved me from all anxiety on the score of causing any of that disappointment which you appear to anticipate, and which I hope

I am, Gentlemen,
Your most obedient and

Most humble Servant,
WM. COBBETT.

BREWING.

A new edition of Cottage Economy is in the press, and it will contain an account of the manner of making Beer by means other than those of the Brewing Machine.-This edition will be out in ten day's time.