[To The Editor of The Whitehaven News.]

       Sir, -  One cannot but laugh at the effusion of that good lady Mrs.
WERE. What naughty little boys we High Churchmen and Catholics would seem, and
in what a truly feminine manner does she lay down the law.

       With regards to her remarks on Protestant Sunday and "prayers for the
dead" it is well known that the former is not in any sense authorised in the
Church of England, and the wonderful Rubic she quotes, though once inserted,
never legally formed any part of the Book of Commons Prayer, and it certainly
does not now, notwithstanding the wonderful amount of emphasis and importance
which this Protestant lady attributes to it. As to "Prayers for the dead," the
usual Catholic arguments apply, and the usual Protestant objections will be
adduced. So argument is really useless.

       May I casually remark that the "Protestant Alliance," is not a body
recognised as belonging to the Church of England, and more than is the "English
Church Union." One has equal authority to the other, and each is considered by
it's respective adherents to have the greater claim, though, coupled with
history, the odds are greatly in favour  of the principles advocated by the E. C.
U. Marvellous," "Instructive," and "timely" are natural epithets in the mouth
of a Protestant, which might receive considerable alteration in the mouth of
a Catholic.

       Yes, why trouble about MANNING, Mrs. WERE? Why, indeed, except that
your perverted his true meaning, and will not apologise for so doing. A Jesuit
to you is a person to be hated and despised, and no treatment is too unkind to
mete out to him. Honesty is the best policy, and it is an argument unworthy of
a Protestant (except that one finds that it is to be so often representative
of those who glory in that name,) and certainly unworthy of a lady to shelve
the real words of MANNING, under the plea of what some other person said, a
method of dealing with the matter which will make all right minded people abhor
the very name of Protestantism.

       It is a pity Mrs. WERE cannot profit by the example of the "Rock,"
which has to pay pretty considerably for its "misstatements" about the Jesuits. I
did not know that history was dead against them. Some things certainly do not
represent them in a good light, but on the other hand, our own glorious Queen
Bess! and the Protestant party are not revealed by history as the clean
handed people we have been led to believe them.

       The persecution of the Romanists at their hands was no whit less
severe than English Churchmen suffered in the days of Mary. I thank Mrs. WERE for
her kind invitation to go over to Rome; when I see the way clear, I shall not
hesitate. But, though I may not be able to adopt  that faith, and its
distinctive doctrines, I hope that I am broad minded and charitable enough to recognise
that Rome has produced in all ages of men of sterling character; and
moreover, the general principles of Christianity, when not weighed down and coated by
a depressive and abusive Protestantism, compel me to give all men their due,
and not by unworthy methods of suppression to slander those whom I don't like.
Honesty was supposed to be a principle of an Englishman. It is limited to man

                                       A Chantry Priest.

P.S. The word used as a nom-de-plume, had no particular application in any
case, hence waste of arguments. If, however, Mrs. WERE knows that it was a
working man in London who destroyed the village crucifix in the North of England,
in the interests of truth and justice, he ought to be handed over to the law to
be dealt with. Does Mrs. WERE see this? Also, who paid his expenses from
London to Yorkshire? - the Protestant Alliance or Mrs. WERE? These are the
pertinent questions.