ror," &c. Conclusionista has not yet shewn that "what may be true cannot be false." He may reason more lucidly later, but it follows not thence that he actually will! Now for a little reasoning on Conclusionista's plan, in which it will be established that all that I have said is correct. Conclusionista says that I have erred in deciding that he was guilty of sophistry and moonshine. But he is fallible; therefore I may not have erred in deciding, &c. But if I may not have erred, he has actually erred in saying that I have erred: now he could not have so erred, if I could err: therefore he must acknowledge that I have not erred. Therefore all that I have said is established by Conclusionista! And yet he thinks I am wrong! Dormitat Homerus! Take another method-" what may be true cannot be false." But from the fallibility of Conclusionista, I may not have erred; therefore it cannot be false that I have not erred. Therefore I have not erred according to fallible Conclusionista. Therefore all that I have said is established by him. Say not, my friend, that I tacitly advocate Pyrrhonism and Scepticism; for there are axioms, &c. which it is the essence of rationality to admit.

And now, much happiness to you, Conclusionista; and to your arguments on the subject in question I say, valeant quantum valere possint! Yours, Mr. Editor, SIGMA.

*

P. S.-I think that Conclusionista would see the inconclusiveness of his reasoning in examining soundly the questions of and objective certainty. When I said above that "I did not understand Conclusionista's meaning," I would be understood as saying that I did not take him to mean what Tau supposes he meant, viz: "that a Church fallible by her own principles, had, by her dogmatical decision, left the Church of Rome just where she found her; and, by inference, that if the Church of Rome were then the true Church, she is so now, and will remain such, notwithstanding her fallible decision.

Our correspondent Sigma, in sealing his letter, clapped the wafer upon this part of his letter, and obliterated the word we have left blank. Not being able to decypher it, and unwilling to intrude our surmises, we have left it vacant, not doubting but the combatants can fill up the space.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TRUTHTELLER ̧

MR. EDITOR,-I perceive that Tau, next door neighbour to Sigma, has favoured your Journal with some observations, which it is natural for me to call sensible, and which Sigma will acknowledge to be polite; though I cannot exactly say how he may relish the pseudomenos. Tau agrees with me that Sigma has proceeded on a misapprehension of the nature of my argument. How he could do so still puzzles me, as the title of my article, "The Church of Rome established by the 39 articles of the Church of England," ought to have been a sufficient guide, even if he had not read the remarks appended to the argument. The title plainly declares that I used the argumentum ad hominem.

Now for the logical and metaphysical part of the business, on which they both seem to be of one mind (I beg them and every one disposed to help me with their criticisms, not to be sparing, I ask for nothing but fair play); I must first observe, that instead of the right formal tactics of the schools, I took what I may call the familiar argument, or the argument of common life in preference. Hence in the second paragraph, which contains the substance of two syllogisms, I have made but one argument (I don't call it a regular syllogism, nor did I ever think it one), where the conclusion of the first syllogism is omitted, as being selfevident; and for the same reason I did not lay it down for the premises of the conclusion I have actually drawn. Any one who pays attention to the reasoning of sensible unlogicated people, must have often observed that this is the way they follow with the greatest effect. The rank and file of Aristotle, in three stiff columns, would cause them to suspect evil designs and stratagem; nothing tends so much to put them on their guard; it makes them absolutely shy. But if you present them an argument in their, I should say our, usual method, they will catch the relation between the inference and the principle from which it is deduced with a rapidity frequently approaching to an intuitive view of the subject. And then what is logic after all but common practice reduced to a system? It appears to me that there is a perfect parallel between the art of logic as to reasoning and grammar with respect to language.-Idioms, which are the most energetic and"

1

beautiful portions of all languages, are not always within the rules of grammar. But I am digressing. You will ask, then, Mr. Editor, why did I put a subsumo the first, and a subsumo the second? I will tell you; I thought indeed that the arguments fairly locked into one another, but my principal motive was to provoke discussion by the apparent formality. Though the argument is clear enough to my own mind, I knew it must lose much of its effect on many others by the cavils it would probably experience. Having looked at human nature for more than one day or two either, I was in hopes it would catch the attention of gentlemen in the habit of raising the scholastic dust, and that the discussion would prove serviceable. Here I must thank Tau, who, though he speaks with humility of his good sense, and would be grateful to the Almighty for an increase of it, seems to me to possess a share with which he may be well satisfied. If he wishes for more, I wish it him also, not by the ounce or the pound avoirdupois, but by the hundred weight.

As to the metaphysical part, though very little of it enters in the subject, I will only say, that, from the argument being totally and solely ad hominem, the phrase which appears to have caused nearly all the obscurity where it occurs, and to have thrown its shade over the rest in a sort of eclipse, now diminishing a few degrees, refers to the admission, or inevitable consequence, to speak with more correctness, from the avowed doctrinal principle of fallibility. I expressed it by may, because I could get on only through conditional inferences, and I introduced the immutability of Truth, because I must consider fallibility as the established church must consider it, i. e. as a revealed dogma: the word necessary is connected to the business in this view and no other. I conceive that as it must be a revealed dogma, if any thing, it might therefore be considered as a necessary Truth, quæ non potest non esse vera; whereas the may applied by Tau to the future increase of his own good sense, is at present a mere contingency; it has nothing to do with the case of my argument. Yet we might dispute about Tau on the grounds of the famous question de faturo contingenti; "Petrus sedebit," "Petrus non sedebit;" "Tau will be wiser than he is," "Tau will not be wiser than he is." One of VOL. V. 202

the two is true now, and necessarily so; for it is repugnant that ̧ Tau should become and not become wiser than he is. Now suppose that Tau, like the Church of England, has had a revelation, real or not real, I care not which, will not the may in that case be divested of its contingency? If so, will it not in his mind, for that is the question, the whole point, will it not in his mind put on the contradictory property of necessity? Truth is not always necessary, says Tau; let it be so. But when a proposition is admitted as necessary by direct inference, can it at the same time be admitted as contingent? Is there a medium between necessary and contingent? If there be, let Tau make his escape through it; he will then be out of my reach.

Tau will oblige me if he will consider my third argument with the same good sense and good temper (an ounce of the latter is worth many pounds avoirdupois of the former quality) as he has done the second argument against the bouncing criticism of Sigma.

I hope to hear again from Sigma; for I was sorry to read his determination to avoid logomachy. I tried to bring him into the field, Mr. Editor, in your Journal of last Saturday-I can only assure him that I have no taste for wordy battles, but that I am very partial to discussion about things, where any useful knowledge may be acquired. It will hurt neither of us if we chat a little in a friendly way; a smart word now and then will only enliven the conversation.

To spare critics the useless trouble of furbishing up their Aristotelic weapons, which, may be, have lain rusty for some time, I think it right to inform them that I am not conscious of having made one strict syllogism throughout the whole of the three paragraphs of the fallibility-argument. It is all plain prose, exhibiting indeed so much of the regimental cut as we may observe daily and hourly among the people. They can therefore dispense with holding a regular court martial on my Majors, or their subalterns. And if your other readers, Mr." Editor, should on any future occasion meet with a disciplined syllogism of mine, that might decently pass at a review before a scientific officer, I beg of them not to be frightened. My belief is, that, whether an argument be drawn up in the vulgar style or in the scholastic style, a conclusion is always a legitimate conclusion if the reason adduced for it be a legitimate

reason.

The name I have assumed in rigid parlance implies nothing more. Mr. Editor, your's,

CONCLUSIONISTA.

article, page 378 of

The question should

have been thus. Q. 3. May the Church of Rome have not erred according to 39?

SOUTHWARK CHARITABLE SOCIETY.

The Anniversary Dinner of the Southwark Charitable Society for Educating poor Catholic Children, took place at the Albion Tavern Aldersgate-street, on Monday last. The Right Rev. Dr. Bramston, Coadjutor V. L. D. presided on the occasion, and was supported on his right by the Right Rev. Dr. Buckley, Col. Stonor, Havlin Burke, Esq. Eneas Macdonnell, Esq. and H. Robinson, Esq.-on the left by the Rev. Daniel M'Donnell, Kiernan, Esq. B. Hodges, Esq. T. M'Kiernan, Esq. -Hennan, Esq. &c. &c. The dinner was excellent, and did credit to the respectable host. After the cloth was removed, and the usual preliminary toasts had been given, the Children educated and clothed by the Establishment were introduced to the Company, when Mr. H. Robinson delivered the following admirable appeal in their behalf.

"I am fully sensible, my Lord, that in times like the present, when the pernicious results of "a little learning" are every where so apparent, that the individual who presumes to advocate the education of the poor has many prejudices to encounter. He is told, and with much truth, that to instruct those to read and write, whom Providence has been pleased to raise among the labouring classes, is raising them above their situation; rendering them discontented with their rank in the gradations of society; and exposing them to all the dangers of becoming vitiated by those numerous seditious and immoral publications, which, at a cheap rate, are disseminated through the land.

"Were it merely to impart to the children of this charity the isolated acquirements of being able to read and write, indeed, my Lord, considering the sphere in which most of them are destined to move, it might be a dangerous boon, and I, for one, should have hesitated to ask you for your support. But it is not education alone which this Institution professes to give to these poor children; we do not cast them adrift without compass or chart; on the contrary, they are thoroughly instructed in their religious duties, and taught that the knowledge which is imparted to them is only to make them better men and better Christians.

"To you, Gentlemen, who are not unobservant of humau nature, and are well acquainted with the doctrines and tendency of our holy religion, it is almost needless for me to dilate on the great social advantages which are produced by instilling into the youthful mind its salutary precepts. The Catholic, like others, may plunge into dissipation, and rush headlong into crime, but in the midst of his career of depravity, a silent monitor, whom he would in vain shake off, will follow him step by step. For even if the voice of conscience should be hushed, and the influence of early principles be unavailing, the very ceremonies of our Church; its