“If you really wish to believe that all Converts to Rome, or most of them, come from the ranks of ‘the Tractarians’ I cannot help it. I can only assure you it is contrary to all my experience. In every case which has come under my notice for the last ten years, there is proof of the truth of what I said in my former note; but I did not, and do not, like to bring a railing accusation against my Evangelical brethren, else I would, as you find, have said, that my experience was quite against the assertion now commonly made. I supposed, however, that other persons had had a different experience from my own, and I charitably allowed ‘Six of one and half-a-dozen of the other.’ For myself I can only say, that though I should like to know well enough how the case stands, I should attach no importance to the fact, if the balance of advantage were a trifle on one side or other; much less would I think of writing to you in an uncourteous or uncharitable tone about it. The extract from Wiseman which you kindly sent me, I easily understand. He, Jesuit like, wishes to damage High Churchmen, because he knows that ours is the only strong ground against Rome; {13} just as in the days of Queen Elizabeth, Jesuits preached Calvinism as Evangelical Ministers and Dissenters, on purpose to divide and destroy Churchmen and their principles. Dr. Wiseman never abuses Low Churchmen. But may I request, that as I have not time for letters on such small points, you rather would, (if you desire it,) call on me any morning you please, and in a Christian and gentle spirit, converse on any important topic which you may desire to discuss. “I am, faithfully yours, (Signed) “WILLIAM. J. IRONS. “To ARTHUR ELLIS, ESQ., R.N.” * * * * * In the foregoing Correspondence between Dr. IRONS and myself it will be seen, that I addressed him under the conviction that he was one with the “Tractarian” party, and that his statement about “six of one and half-a-dozen of the other,” was offered as a kind of defence of his friends. In the answers of Dr. IRONS to my communications, it is quite evident, that he never thought of denying his identity with the “Tractarian” party; the tenor of his letters is not to shew that he is not a Tractarian “in any sense,” but to defend “Tractarianism” from the charge of being the primary cause of the many secessions to Rome from amongst his clerical brethren. Compare the letters of the Rev. Doctor with his more recent statement of not being a Tractarian “in any sense,” and there can be no doubt as to what must be the verdict. There are, however, some points in both the letters of Dr. IRONS to which I would allude more fully, and comment upon more at length. The Rev. Doctor states that he is anxious to get a list of the “ascertainable and presentable names of the Converts.”