and regenerate, and wise and virtuous citizens of the United States, are not only to witness, but, it is feared, to become the victims, of a novel display of the same recklessvanity and visionary zeal.

It is deeply to be regretted, Mr. Herttell, that not contented with scouting the name of God from the House of Assembly, you should wish to banish the same holy and reverend name from our courts of justice; and thus, though this cannot be your wish, as it certainly will be the effect of your design, to impair the force of those legal and judicial oaths, upon which depend so often the sacred rights of life, liberty and property. It is true, you have not succeeded in this scheme, though you predict with strong confidence, that a future legislature will establish your principle of nullifying oaths, and opening wide the portals of justice, for the perjured and the unprincipled to enter and gorge themselves with the wages of pollution.

But be this as it may, we learn that you have still another, and another budget to unfold. You have it in view, it appears, to tax the clergy, and also to repeal the law, or laws, by which church property is exempted faom taxation. To a church and state alliance, I have already said, and now repeat it, I ever have been, still am, and ever shall be, decidedly and inflexibly opposed. But a donation to the church, or the clergy, in any shape, is not a church and state alliance, or any thing like it. It is nothing more than would be a voluntary gift by an individual, either to a church, a clergyman, or, if you please, a beggar on the highway. There is nothing in the constitution prohibiting such a donation. Neither in the letter, nor the spirit of that instrument, is there any restraint upon the generosity or liberality of the legislature or the people. But both are left at perfect liberty to follow the dictates of benevolence and humanity and therefore all gifts or grants to the clergy, or the church, on the part of the state, are strictly constitutional. It is certain, that if kept within reasonable bounds, they can be of no injury to the state, but may, on the contrary, promote her best interests.

You assent, with all your heart-for you have proved it on the floor of the Assembly-to the clause in the constitution, which excludes clergymen from the rights and privile

ges guaranteed by the same instrument to all other citizens ; I mean the clause which expressly excludes them from holding any office, either civil or military and yet you would impose upon them the same burthens that are borne by those who enjoy all those privileges Your language to a clergyman, when fairly translated, reads thus: "You may live as a slave; but you shall be taxed as a freeman. You shall pay for the freedom, which others enjoy; but to you the boon, which the God of Nature has bestowed upon all, shall be denied. Taxation, without representation, was the insupportable grievance, which roused the resentment of our fathers, and they fought, bled, and died, in the revolution, to redress it: But upon you the grievance shall still be visited. You are not represented-for not one of your body can hold a seat in the legislature; yet you shall nevertheless be taxed, as your fathers, though not represented in Parliament, were taxed by their British Tyrants: And this is the return we make you, for the eloquence, which many of your body exerted in the pulpit and the forum, and the blood which others of you shed on the field of battle, to redress the grievance of taxation without representation; and to redeem your country from the galling yoke of a foreign tyrant! You have labored successfully with your co-patriots, to make a political Eden of your country; but of the Tree of Liberty, which you have jointly planted in her soil, the fruit is for them, and not for you! It is true we graciously permit you to water and to nourish it with your blood, if you please, as a common soldier; but as a sergeant, or even as a corporal, you shall enjoy neither the honor nor the reward. As a common foot-soldier you may die bravely in the last entrenchment, in defence of your country, or nobly scale the walls and plant her standard on the citadel of the enemy, whilst your general hangs back, or flies as a coward from the scene of action; yet he shall enjoy the honor and emolument, you the danger and the death!" Is this, Mr. Herttell, deistical justice? Is this deistical liberty? Is this your boasted Liberalism? Disfranchise a portion of your fellow-citizens; and still call upon them to share the pecuniary burthens of the Commonwealth! Deny to a useful and meritorious body of men all the honors and emoluments of the constitution; and yet be willing that they shall shed

their blood in defence of that constitution! From such liberty and justice, and especially from such liberality, we may well pray to heaven for the speedy deliverance of our country!

I am well aware, and have freely admitted the fact in a former letter, that there was a time when the clergy were a dangerous body of men-but that time was, when they had all the learning, and consequently all the power, in their hands; and they abused that power as any other body of men would have done, had they possessed it. It was the failing of human nature, and not the clerical spirit, that caused the abuse; and a body of lawyers, merchants, mechanics or farmers, possessing the same exclusive learning and power, would have played the same game. To "feel power, and forget right," is the sin that most easily besets mankind, whether clergy or laity. But the dark period alluded to, when learning and power were thus confined to a single corps, has not only passed away-but so long as the press shall remain free, so long as any portion of the community can avail itself of that powerful engine, to vindicate its rights, and combat prejudice and error with reason and truth, it can never return. And further, I do not hesitate to affirm, and justice indeed to a calumniated body of men loudly demands it, that the clergy of this country, as a body, have never possessed, much less betrayed, a disposition to monopolize either all the learning, or all the power. On the contrary, our history abundantly proves, that they have ever been willing to share the burthens, as well as the benefits of our free institutions. No set of men took a more decided or a more active part, than did the clergy, in establishing the Common Schools of New-England: this is a fact which cannot be denied; nor can it be denied, that in the early wars with the Indians, no set of men bore more cheerfully or bravely the brunt of battle, or shed their blood more profusely. The Clerical Historian of those wars, the Rev. Mr. Hubbard, fought himself in a number of the most bloody and decisive engagements; and so did other clergymen, whose names and heroic virtues have shed unfading lustre on the character of their country. And did they promote universal education, in order to monopolise learning, and make slaves of an educated and well inform

ed people! And did they fight for their country against savage and barbarous foes, to perpetuate ignorance and retard civilization! And did they, in the revolution of '76, exert their eloquence at the altar, and shed their blood in the field, against a foreign tyrant, as the foes and not the friends of civil liberty! Really, my friend, if you should induce the legislature or the people of this state to believe such absurdities, neither you, nor I, nor any rational being, could consistently covet the honor of being a citizen of a state, so easily cheated out of its senses, and made the dupe of imposture.

Almost a solitary contrast is sufficient to show the difference between the clergy of the 14th and 15th centuries in Europe, and those of the 18th and 19th in the United States In the former time and place, the clergy not only monopolized literature, but religion. Profane science they alone possessed; and the sacred science of the bible they controlled the priest at the altar could alone read or interpret it; for its mysteries were enveloped in huge masses of parchment, being written and not printed; and its circulation among the laity or people, was entirely prohibited, and no such thing as a family bible was known.

But the Clergy of the United States, instead of evincing a disposition to shut up the sacred volume, as being beyond the reach of vulgar minds to comprehend, have, on the contrary, organized bible societies, and made every possible exertion to extend universally the circulation of the holy scriptures in their vernacular tongue.

Again-If in the 14th and 15th centuries the policy of the clergy was to keep the people in ignorance of all science; have we not seen, as already mentioned, the clergy of the British Colonies, now the United States, exerting themselves in every direction, not only in promoting the establishment of common schools. strictly so called, but laboring to have children instructed in infant schools, and female seminaries of every description. In every city, in every village, we behold the benign influence of their labors, in extending the blessings of education. And this again revives the question, would they, if they intended to enslave their country, begin by diffusing knowledge among the ignorant? I know the reply to this is that they are stri

ving to have education run in certain channels only, such as they can eventually command. But the fallacy of this is apparent to every philosophic observer, who well knows, that if men once imbibe the elements of education, their minds, if they have any, are ever after free.

He that can once read and write, and has a thirst for sci] ence, and consequently a mind for it, cannot be arrested in his progress by priestcraft, or any other craft; he will, in the language of honest David Crockett, "go ahead;" he will cut his own path-way, and march through it, untrammeled by precedent, unawed by authority. If an honest as well as a gifted man, scorning all craft, all policy, and all shackles, he will take Truth for his guide, and freedom for his object; and his own happiness, the good of his country and of mankind, and the glory of his Creator and Redeemer, will form the triune aim of his ambition and his efforts.

In my next, Mr. Herttell, I shall touch upon your pretensions as the friend of the Working Men; and shall show clearly how inconsistent are all professions for the welfare of the laboring portion of the people, with a disbelief of the truths of Divine Revelation: In short, that no man can be a real Working Man, or the Working Man's real friend, and be at the same time an enemy of the Gospel.

Albany, February 12th, 1834.

SHERLOCK.

LETTER II.

TO THOMAS HERTTELL, ESQ.,

Member of Assembly, for the city of New-York, 1884. SIR, It is well known, that Thomas Paine, and the few associates he could then muster, had formed, a long while before his death, a Deistical Club in the city of NewYork; and that a blind man, by the name of Palmer, was in the habit of preaching to them. I do not relish puns upon the physical or mental infirmities of my fellow-men; yet in this case I cannot help saying, that the Scriptural allusion