This conversation was presently interrupted by the entrance of that frightful-looking priest, whose inquisitor-like visage had so horrified Markham a short time before. The young man would have retired, but Signora Rivolta desired him to stay, and forthwith she introduced him by name to the dreaded priest. And when Father Martini spoke to the barrister, there was in his voice something not altogether unpleasant. There was solemnity and formality, but there was also kindness and even persuasiveness; and as Markham entered more particularly into conversation with him, there were in his sentiments and expressions strong manifestations of liberal feelings and comprehensive views. Now as Markham knew that Father Martini was zealous for the faith and discipline of his own church, he also supposed that he must be grossly ignorant and illiberal. Markham’s reasoning run thus: Father Martini professes a religion which is absurd and irrational; therefore Father Martini must be an absurd and irrational man: Father Martini professes a religion which assumes to be the only way of salvation; Father Martini, therefore, must suppose that all the rest of the world must be lost, and therefore he must be exceedingly illiberal. Older men than Markham, and men of greater pretence than he, have used the same leaky logic, without perhaps acknowledging it to themselves. Not frequently is it forgotten that nine times out of ten a man’s character has more influence on his religion than his religion has on his character; as a man’s shoe more frequently takes the shape of his foot, than his foot takes the shape of his shoe. But discussions of this nature are for shoemakers and theologians. So we proceed with our narrative. Markham became rather pleased with the aged priest, and was also pleased with himself for his own liberality. The priest also was pleased with Markham, and thought him a very promising subject for conversion, on account of the great candour with which he spoke of the Catholic church, and the temperate manner in which he discussed divers points on which, in their interview, they happened to touch. The logic of the priest was not indeed much better than the logic of Markham; for candour towards an opponent is not always a symptom of conversion to the said opponent’s creed or theory. There needs, in order to conversion, a strong principle of partisanship. This our young friend possessed not. Nevertheless, the two happened to be well pleased with each other; and there is some good, some religion even, in brotherly love. There is not a great superabundance of that article in the world; whenever therefore it does appear, it should be greeted well.