LOYALIST ONCE MORE.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3483, 23 February 1880, Page 2

LOYALIST ONCE MORE.

To the Editor of the Evening Stab.

Sib,—This person I see has ventured to appear again. He says he little thought such a storm of invective would be hurled at him, &c. It is not hurled at him, however, but at his libellous language on Protestants. He must be green indeed if he supposed that he could so prostitute history and yet come off victorious without the notice of others. There are a few real Protestants still at the Thames, thank God, who will defend their principles against all such as he to the bitter end if nepessary. In his second letter he

evades my strictures by trying to make out Protestants to be as cruel as lioman Catholics. He must know if he lias read history correctly that the persecutionary propensities of Protestants have Wen but as a drop in a bucket compared with the cruelty of the hierarchy of Home ; very few Protestants have been guiltyof cruel persecutions. The teaching of Protestants is not persecution, but the teachof Rorno is persecution to cruel and bitter death of all who will not fall in with their horrible blasphemies. People of the times of the Information wbo came out from Rome had necessarily about them much of the old leaven of that religion,, which required time and better teaching to work off. Moreover, even in these days people who have for the best part of a life been steeped in Rome's pernicious teaching, and who leave it to join some other ism, have yet to learn what is true Christianity, for the Reformation stopped short of its true good, and degenerated into sects and parties which have grown and multiplied to this day. What the world needs—ah! aud the isms also, in these days is the Christianity of Christ himself and His Apostles. They are deficient in that, and so they are what they are —anything but Christians as Christ taught Christianity, but yet very far removed from Rome's doctrinal and practical abominations. This by the way, however, and now I will hiK^-^iuwrtfteT' look.^tvjj^#har,~as~rsfiafr"call him, for I can no longer look upon him as a British loyalist. The Thames people should know his name, though he himself says he would be a donkey indeed lo reveal it. Perhaps your readers may now discover the key to the revelation for very many are curious to discover the secret. Was Ito dissect bis' first letter and notice it in detail; demolished he must bo as a loyalist for ever; but I shall simply confine myself to one sentence. Here it is :" If I had cared to be an informer, many, were the Irishmen I could have impeached lor highly [treasonable language, addressed to to me ia confidence "—I suppose after the style* of the Fenian and Ribbonmen's oaths. A. pretty loyalist this, is he not? Lowbar must know that all conspiracies and.plots, against legitimate Governments are the outcome of treasonable language— Governments general think so, and act accordingly, or they used tp do so. Treason is first in the mind, them from the mouth, and then ultimately in practice by the action of the whole man or woman. The three links of this chain are inseparable, and it may be observed in a family as well as in a nation. Novr if this, chain is not destroyed by speedily breaking the second link rebellion is certain. But Lowbar would do nothing to break the second link—not he. Then were is his loyalty ? I give aa illustration.' What would this man have done supposing he had been in the secret of the gunpowder plot, so called; would he not have allowed the conspirators to blow up the ' Parliament P With his expressed views in the above sentence, who can come to any other conclusion? It would not have been his business to become an informer. So the representatives of the nations might have been murdered ia cold blood for ought he cared. Now in the plots and conspiracies which are beginning to fill the earth against ligitimate governments, and which are certain to increase—while Romanists will he at the bottom of very many of them—'l can come to no other conclusion than this: that Lowbar is a dangerous character as aa official in any Protestant Government. To my mind assassination under any circumstances is the most dastardly and diabolical thing- a bein_g_ called a man can be guilty of. Ireland is full of it; and yet if there are no informers how is it to be prevented ? And yet it is not the business of a Protestant government to impeach; to me it is quite a new doctrine for Protestants to hold, and woe be to them presently if they allow it to spread unchallenged. God help us! What are we corning too. No doubt the object of Lowbar in writing. as he has done is to curry favour with Roman Catholics with a view to personal advance; ment. Well, let him beware! I have my eye on two persons at the Thames who have done the same thing under different circumstances. But where are they now P I need not name them; they are despised j by all common sense and right-minded j people. Beware of currying favour with Rome! I say this to the Press as well as to my fellow-citizens. To close. You know well that I have no personal ill-will or animosity towards you, nor indeed to anyone else; but I can never subscribe to your seditious and libellous views : your currying favour with Rome's idolatrous I followers will ruin you if you have j I not a care. 1 most-cordially eudorse the words of Fairfax as a termination to the controversy so far as I am concerned. "Your whole letter induces a feeling of sadness that any person holding the position you do should so far forget his duty to his Queen and country as to endeavour—for the sake of currying favour with the Catholic party at the Thames—to foment ill-feeling between his fellow colonists of New Zealand ; " and I add, we 'colonists have quite enough to trouble us without bringing up old country hatreds of bygone time; and I sincerely hope that no such letter as that signed Loyalist will ever appear again in a Thames paper. A.nd now, sir, I must thank you for your impartiality in giving both sides.of the question.—l am, &o M