IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) 7 « ^ '^o {./ <° W^.. . '^ Aj ,<' <€?- f/u CIHM/iCMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le mcilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-6tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. The to th The posi of t» fllmi D D □ □ □ D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manquo Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. r~^ Additional comments:/ I I Commentaires suppldmentaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es C~| Pages restored and/or laminated/ J Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul6es p-^^Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ L^ Pages d^colordes, tachet^es ou piqu^es □ Pages detached/ Pages d^tach^es r~7 Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualit^ indgale de I'impression [""l^lncludes supplementary material/ I — I Comprend du materiel supplementaire I I Only edition available/ D Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film^es cb nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Orig begi the I slon othe first sion Drill The shal TINI whii Map diffc entii begi righi requ metl VARIOUS PAGINGS. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X V 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X Itafis i du lodifier ' une mage The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Archives of Ontario Library The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grfice d la gdn^rositd de: Archives of Ontario Library Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nattetd de l'exemplaire filmd, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. irrata to pelure, n d □ 32X Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^4»- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frarr«es as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: 1 2 3 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont fiimds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autrcs exemplaires originaux sont film^s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte un& telle empreinte. liii des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ^- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent §tre fllmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est film6 d partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 4 5 6 THE BISHO? OF EXETER'S CHARGE; DELIVEKED AT HIS TRIENNIAL VISITATION, ^ V- . y.-^--.„ IN • ,^' AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, AND OCTOBER, 1839, Ml= -.ijt rfA* FOURTH EDITION. i ii/? ££ SHILLINGS AND SIXPENCE. CHARGE DKI.IVERKD TO THE CLERGY OK THE DIOCESE OF EXETEK BY THE RIGHT REVEREND HENRY, LORD BISHOP OF EXETER, AT HIS TRIENNIAL VISITATION IN THE MONTHS OF AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, AND OCTOBER, 1839. FOURTH EDITION. LONDON: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 1839. f 'm* t.ONDON : Printed by Wii,i.t\M l.'i.owRRnnd So'vs, Slnnilbrd Silrci't. f '«H> TO rnK CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF EXETER, THIS CHARGE, PUBLISH KD AT THEIR REQUEST, IS DEDICATED BY THEIK Al'FECTIONATE FRIEND AND BROTHKH, H. EXETER. 4 ADVERTISEMENT. My Clergy must not be considered as having com- mitted themselves to an assent to all that is contained in this Charge, by their request that 1 would publish it. By reason of its length, some parts were omitted at one or other of the places at which I held my Visit- ation. Some parts, indeed, were written while I was on my tour ; and even at the places at which I last visited — Tiverton, Honiton, and Exeter — one or two long passages were not delivered, particularly much of what relates to Australia, and to the Pamphlet circulated by the " Committee of Privy Council on Education." Some delay has been caused in the publication by preparing the heads of a Church Discipline Bill, which will be found in Appendix II. 3. tl*» VII C () N T K N 'I' S. I. The Church in Australia . II. The Church in Canada . III. The Government Scheme of Puhlic Kducat IV. Act for al)ridgins PlurahticB and enforcing C'lergy . . . • V. Church Discipline Hill VI. Theoh)gical Studies— Oxford Tracts 1. Divine Commission of tlie Christian 2. The Sacraments . 3. Tradition 4. Errors ascribed to these Writers VII. Church Associations )n Reside iice of Ministry 2 14 20 .54 .5.5 58 59 64 85 «!*• APPENDIX. I. Correspondence with Lord John Russell II. On Church Discipline Bill .... 1. Breviate of a proposed Bill 2. Protest of Bishop of Exeter against the Bill oi the last Session .... 3. Correspondence with the Bishop of London 89 90 105 115 121 •h p* CHARGE, >^^c. ^c. V ' ^ Reverend Brethren, 111 meeting you again, alter an interval of three yea/s, in an age of more than connnon anxiety to every faithful IMinister of Christ and every attached member of the Church, I have the gratifying duty of calling on you to join me in humble and thankful acknowledgment of God's mercy, in hitherto preserving* to us those institutions which have been the best sup- port of our national greatness, and the surest foundation on which to rear any structure of real improvement, whether in Church or State. Our peculiar duties will limit our active exertions to the concerns of the Church ; for, while we cease not to claim the common rights of British subjects, we shall best prove ourselves worthy of continuing to enjoy them, by exercising them with a sole view to God's honour, and to the advancement of his kingdom among men. Political events will in- terest us, mainly, as they tend to produce results, whether of good or ill, to the cause of true Religion, In looking, with this object solely in view, to the present aspect of political contention, there are two particulars which especially challenge our observation, — one, which respects the interests of Religion in our Colonies, — the other, which hardly less concenis K 2 the same interests at home. Both involve tlie Si.me principle, and tend to similar results: both, in my judgment, demand the vigilant circumspection, and the zealous and energetic, though discreet and temperate, exertions of us the Ministers of God's Holy Word, in appealing to the fidelity of a Christian people, for an effectual resistance to innovations in our national po- licy, which would level the distinctions between truth and falsehood, even in those matters in which the highest spiritual interests of men are involved. 1 begin Avith w^hat immediately concerns our Brethren in the Colonies. Within the last few years, a course of policy has been instituted, and pursued, in respect to the Colonies of Great Britain, which is wholly unexampled, not only in our own history, but also, if I mistake not, in the history of any other Christian nation. Not only has equal protection, (for God forbid that we should ever repine at equ-dl protection!) but equal encouragement has been given by Government to every description of reli- gious faith, and every denomination of professing Christians, in some of the most important dependencies of the British Crown. In Australia— a region which seems destined by Providence to open a wider field to British en- terprise, and to be the future scene of grander re- sults, whether to our honour or our shame, than the last generation would have contemplated as possible,— in Australia, a system has been for some time pursued, which would seem to indicate an utter indifference, on the part of those who dispense the national Treasure, whether truth or falsehood shall characterize the reli- gious creeds of any of the Colonists. The production of a certain sum of money, and the signatures of a certain number of names, are all that is requisite for <•»» J 3 <••• t ol)taiiiing from (loverninent aid in the construction of places of religious worship, and in the payment of reli- gious teachers. In order that this matter may be fully understood, it is necessary to state, that, until within the last few years, a seventh part of the waste lands in this colony was reserved for the endowment of the Church. In 1829 and 1830 it was directed that a portion of these lands should be sold, or alienated under quit-rents ; but the produce of the sales and the quit-rents, reserved, were still to l)e applied in aid of the Establishment to which they belonged. In 1831, and not before, it was communicated to the Governor of Van Diemen's Land, by the Government at home, that it was not intended to appropriatr- hmds in aid of the Church and schools, but to maintain them out of the ordinary revenue. These new instructions (which, however, did not cancel the a})pointments formerly made, but still left to the Church the right of retaining property in the waste lands — in particular, the quit-rents — which, though far short of what was originally contemplated by Govern- ment, was still by no means inconsiderable*) — these in- structions were, unhappily, the cause, or the occasion, of a very speedy desertion of the Church by the Crown. The charge of supporting the Church, being now cast on the ordinary revenue (though that ordinary revenue received the benefit of the produce of the Church lands), soon afforded a pretext for maintaining, that, as all the colonists of all religious persuasions contributed in equal proportion to the public revenue, it was but just that the establishmerl of the religion of all should be equally provided for by the public. The Governor of New South Wales, Sir R. Bourke, in a despatch of * See Despatch of Lieut.-Gov. Arthur, 26 Jan. 1830, p. 71. (Papers of H. C, 1837. No. 11-2.) J 4 30th of September, 1833, pressed this consideration strongly on the attention of the English Government. It would be " impossible," he said, " to establish a "dominant and endowed Church without much hos- " tility, and great improbability of its becoming perma- " nent ; as the inclination of the colonists, which keeps " pace with the spirit of the age, is decidedly adverse " to such an institution." He further gave it as his opinion, that " in lat/ing the foundation of the Chris- " tian Religion' (such are the words of Sir Richard Bourke) " in this young and rising Colony, by equal " encouragement held out to its professors in their seve- " ral ciiurches, peace, loyalty, and good morals would " be alike promoted." That this reasoning did not convince the minister to whom it was addressed, Mr. Stanley, will not be sur- prising. It seems to have equally failed with all sub- sequent Governments, until 30th November, 1835, when a despatch to Sir R. Bourke from Lord Glenel"- a-nounced, that "inthe general principle upon which " his plan was founded, as applicable to New South " Wales, Her Majesty's Government entirely con- " curred."— p. 14. Meanwhile, a similar correspondence hafl been pass- ing between Colonel Arthur, Lieut.-Governor of the kindred and neighbouring colony of Van Diemen's Land, and the Government at home ; but conducted in a very different spirit. Colonel Arthur, though certainly very liberal, fell in this respect far short of Sir R. Bourke. He avowed himself to " inclme stro7igly "in favour of the Established Church, notwith- " standing its imperfections in some particulars, into " which I need not (he says) now enter"— and he gave a proof of his preference by " bringing up his own " family in connection with that communion:'- p. 71. J n This, I submit, is not the language of a bigoted Church- man. Still he professed, as we see, a strong inclina- tion in favour of the Church ; and, so far, he probably was thought less worthy of attention than Sir R. Bourke, who, in all his numerous and voluminous despatches, so far as I can discover, does not appear in a single instance to indicate the slightest preference of any Church, or any Creed whatever ; the only feeling on this subject expressed by this representative of the Sovereign, in New South Wales, being that of hos- tility to an established Church. Colonel Arthur was very earnest in pressing on the Government tlie absolute necessity, for the welfare of the Colony, that the number of clergymen of the Church of England should be enlarged. In a despatch of 14th October, 1833 (nearly the same date as of that which I have cited of Sir R. Bourke), he reminds His Majesty's Government that he " has before /^-e^wew^ urged the *' necessity" of that measure ; and he entreats that he may be " permitted again to urge the paramount im- *• portance of this point. Sir," said he, " I pointed out, " several years ago, as forcibly as I had the power to " put it, that penitentiaries, treadwheels, flogging, " chain-gangs, and penal settlements, would all prove " ineffectual, either to prevent or to punish crime, •• without religious and moral instruction. There " must be a mind to wo'\ upon, or all punishment will '* be utterly unavailing." — p. 61. In the following year, 15th October, 1834 (p. 63), he renews his representations, in terms so honourable to himself, and so very appropriate to the circum- stances of the Colony, that I am not afraid of wearying you by reciting them. ** In several despatches, I have endeavoured to bring *^ before you, in the strongest possible manner, the •' necessity which exists, iiotvvithstuiiding the present *' expense of tiie Ecclesiasticiil Estsblishment, for an " extension of the number of chaplains ; a subject " which perhaps I cannot too often advert to; essential ** as the ministrations of religion are everywhere, but " more especially where, in addition to the natural " proneness of the human heart to evil, there is also to •• be combated that moral pollution, which is the neces- •' sary result of the unbridled wickedness in which so " large a proportion of the population must have rioted " habitually, before their expatriation, and which it is " our duty to counteract, by the only means I am aware " of that have ever yet proved effectual." To select all the passages in which Lieut.-Governor Arthur urges the duty of an increase of the Church Establishment on the Government at home, would be to exhibit portions of almost every despatch from him, of which we are in possession. But the question presents itself— What success had these honest, these repeated, these warm remonstrances, on the Government to whom they were addressed ? — It was long before any answer seems to have been given ; and, indeed, the frequent changes in the Colonial Office, which occurred in the interval, will account for much of the delay. At length, on the 31st January, 1836, a permanent Colonial Se- cretary, Lord Glenelg, informs the Lieutenant-Governor " that he has had under consideration his several de- " spatches on the subject of the extension of the means •' of rehgious instruction in Van Diemen's Land"— (of which, however, he takes no special notice whatever) —but he adds " that he had given nmch attention to the " same subject as respects New South Wales- ..here " he had precise information of the relative numbers of " the different denominations of Christians from Sir R. ** Bourke"— (namely, that " the members of the Church f 4 " of England are the most numerous — the Roman Ca- *' tholics are one-fifth of the whole population — and the *' members of the Church of Scotland form a smaller ** proportion)". — P. 3. " Assuming, however," says he, ** the general similarity, in this respect, of the two Co- *' lonies, the documents which I now transmi* to you " will place you in possession of the principle which Her '' Majesty's Government are prepared to sanction in any " future law which may be passed by the Legislative " Council in the Colony for the appropriation of so much " of the Colonial revenue as may be applicable to this ge- " neral object" (i. e. for the support of religion). — p. 65. Now, what was the principle, on which alone the Government were prepared to sanction any law passed by the Legislature of Van Diemens Land? The principle which Sir R. Bourke had recommended, that of having no Established Church, — and, in adopting which, Lord Glenelg had expressly said that he did so in deference lo the judgment " of the Governor and the " Legislative Council, to whom he committed the task " of suggesting and enacting such lav/s, for the distri- " bution and appropriation of the funds applicable to " the general purposes of religion and education."— p. 14. But how does this apply to Van Diemen's Land ? I have stated both the judgment and the feelings of the Governor — I will now state those of the Legislature. In the despatch of Colonel Arthur of 1 4th October, 1833, he writes that " the Legislative Council had " advised the appointment of six new Chaplains" — and on the 16th of May, 1834, he states (p. 62), that the same body had " unanimously voted the necessary " advances " for the contemplated building of six Churches — and that there had been expressed the ear- nest desire " of the Legislative Council, and of the ♦• pnwtr.vitivittii fvovtovnllti i'nv rstt fi.intfi'n.vin'n nfthp i jhliroh I 8 " Eatabllshnient, so that tlie ordinances of i-eligion might " be phiced within the reach of the more remote settlers, " and also be brought home to the convicts labouring on " the roads and in the chain-gangs." — p. 61. Thus, it appears that the British Government was willing to attend to the judgment and the feelings of a (Colonial Legislature and people, if represented to be adverse to a Church Estaldishment-but decidedly opposed to them, however strongly expressed, when in favour of the Extension of the Church. Even this is not all : Lieut.- Governor Arthur re- minded the Government at home, that there Avas no longer the same financial ohjection to this great measure which had heretofore prevented its adoption. " I the niore earnestly," says he, " press upon your " attention this most interesting suhject, as it does not " appear that the obstacles, whi,;li formerly prevented " Her Majesty's Government from acquiescing in an •| extension of the Church Establishment, need now " be taken into consideration, the revenue having " tvithin the last Jive 1/ ears no cvceedinirly incroaaed " —p. 63. ""^ Such were the urgent applications of Lieut. -Go- vernor Arthur on this subject. Before he could obtain an answer to any of them, he had sanctioned votes of the Legislative Council, for aid to other bodies of Christians in erecting places of Divine Worship, and recorded his reasons for so doing on the books of the Council in the following terms : — ^^ *' I should wish to record my deliberate opinion, " that, until much more extensive assistance is aforded " to the Established Church, such advances as these, in '• aid of other religious communions, nmst necessarily " be made, or a large class of the community will be " without amj Teliginus or moral instruction whatever. ti i" i w|* 9 " A state of things exists in this Colony, unknown in " other communities ; and, if every effort be not made *' to reform, by religious instruction, the lowest orders, " and especially the convict population, all other mea- " sures to reclaim them will be, if not wholly iiiope- " rative, at least of very transitory advantage." — p. 73. Again, in reference to this matter, in his Despatch of January 26th, 1836, he says, " It is the best expe- " dient that I can think of to supply, at a trifling charge, ** the lamentable want of a more extensive Church " Establishment." At the same time he proposes to charge " the amount on the Land Revenue— which has been ** credited with the proceeds of the sale of the lands *' originally reserved to the Church." But he adds what is well worthy of deep attention: "To avoid all possible mis- " conception, however, as it may not immediately occur '* to your Lordship, it is proper I should state, that the " lands were reserved exclusively for the support of *' the Church of England:'— ^.Q^. That, under so pressing a want of the means of any religious instruction for the Colony which he governed, and having been himself compelled to have recourse to expedients so questionable, he should have, at length, received with acquiescence, and even with pleasure, the announcement of any mode sanctioned by Government of supplying that want— even though it rooted up the very foundations of a Church Establishment — may grieve, but can hardly surprise us. Such is a brief outline of the course which has been pursued in Australia, in e blishing this most novel and most unrighteous principle. To look minutely into all its details would not suit the present occasion. Be it sufficient to say, that by it not only every variety of Protestant Dissent is fostered and patronized, but the Romish Church itself is installed with equal honour, and recognised as of equal purity with our own. It is \ 10 notorious tlmt a Roman Catholic Bishop is not only permitted to exercise Episcopal authority in the Colony, hut also receives a stipend of 500/. [)er annum from Government lor his services. The history of this affair is so illustrative of the prevailing ])olicy, that I will briefly narrate it to you. In February, 1835, Lord Aberdeen, finding that ar- rangements had been made by his predecessor, Mr. Spring Rice, for sending out four additional Roman Catholic CliJiplains to New South Wales, gave effect to th(; ap- pointments, and assigned an annual stipend of 150/. to each. One of these was Dr. Folding, who, like the others, " was intended only to officiate as Chaplain ; but, " as it was " subsequently considered advisable by tlie " Church to which he belonged, that he should be per-^ " mitted to exercise Episcopal authority, the sanction of ** the Government was given to the arrangement."— p. 27. Lord Aberdeen, however, was so fully satisfied of the unfitness of his being paid by the British (iovern- ment in the character of Bishop, that, in tlie Despatch which announced the appointment to Sir R. Bourke, he distinctly said, tlint, although his powers wowVX be superior to those of the Rev. Mr. UUatliorne, who, as Vicar-General, received 200/. per annum, he " was " not prepared to sanction the augmentation of Dr. " Foldings stipend,'' even to that sum, unless Mr. UUatliorne were transferred to Van Diemen's Land. This being arranged, Dr. Folding was to receive 200/. per annum; but with a distinct intimation that no higher stipend would be sanctioned by the English Minister, However, before Dr. Folding's arrival in the Colony, a change of Government had taken place in England— and immediately Sir R. Bourke scrupled not in desnite of the Despatch from Lord Aberdeeton, — , ^. - - ^ ** take the advice of the Council upon the amount ot •' stipend which they would be willing to assign to •« «< n *• Dr. Polding, if lltn* Majesty V GovoriuiuMit coiisenttHl '• to enlarge it."— p. 28. Tiie Council reconunencled 500/. per annum, which was proposed to the Govern- ment at home, and iorthwith assented to, although it wiis in direct contradiction to the principle estahlislit;(l five months helbn', and acted upon in all cases of the Church of Enghmd, that " the amount of private contri- " hution should he the condition and measure of puhlic " jtid." — p. 15. Ill this case, there was no private con- trihution whatever. This was not all. Lord Aherdeen, 1 have said, had refused to sanction any greater allowance than 150/. per annum to Dr. Folding, if the Vicar-General re- mained in New South Wales, having a stipend of 200/. per annum. It was arranged, therefore, that he should be transferred to Van Diemen's Land : instead, how- ever, of going, either he or a successor ot his is still there as Vicar-General with a stipend of 250/. per an- num — and this, too, without any private contribution. The case is not yet complete. Dr. Folding, in his passage to New South Wales, landed in Van Diemen's Land ; and, upon his urgent representation, while he Avas there, the sum of 1500/. was voted by the Council towards the erection of a Roman Catholic Chapel. No private contribution was wae induced to grant us a due proportion qf the favours which they lavish on other denominations qf' Christians.' — The - W>-eMy Freeman s Journur oi 2\s{ Sept,, 1839. 14 energies of Government, and the treasures oi'the State, are employed in the goodly work of giving fresh life and activity to Popery, even in those regions where it was on the point of expiring by reason of its own weakness. But Australia, the great seedplot of future nations, English by name— (God grant that they may be truly Enghsh too in principle and faith!) — is not the only region in which we have to deplore this seeming aban- donment of those ancient principles of national policy, which hallowed our political institutions by combining them with the establishment of true Religion. In the Canadas, provision was made by the lil)erality of King George III. for the future support of the Church, of which he was, not in words and by office only, but in heart and affection, a nursing father. He endowed witli Crown Lands, the increasing value of which, it was intended by him, should bear a due proportion to the increase of the wealth and population of the Colony, *' a Protestant Clergy." What may be the strict meaning of that phrase in legal construction, as high legal authorities have differed, or seemed to differ, it would ill become me in this place, or on this occasion, to affect to pro- nounce a judgment. It is enough for my present pur- pose to state, that on the supposed vagueness of this phrase has been built a claim not only for all sorts of teachers of all varieties of Religion calling itself Pro- testant, but also for the Clergy of the Church of Rome itself. The Government at home (I lament to say it) has most unhappily sanctioned and encouraged this most mischievous and unprincipled agitation. With unfair- ness, which, unless on the plainest evidence, ought to be 15 incredible, it has directed Sir G. Arthur* to urge the Provincial Legislature to realize these wild views: thus diverting the endowments of true Religion to the main- te -ance of every species and form of error, in contra- vention of the express provisions of the Constitutional Act of 1791, even as declared in the Opinion of the law officers of 1819, who excluded the claims of all other Mi- nisters of Religion except the Clergy of the Churches of England and Scotland. The Government did this, even though they expressly made their confidence in the cor- rectness of that Opinion the ground of their refusal to comply with the prayer of the Bishop and Clergy of Up- per Canada, that the question of the appropri ition of the Clergy-reserves to any other Clergy, than themselves, should be referred for judicial decision either to the Judges of England, or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.f One of the Legislative Bodies of Upper Canada, in willing compliance with the policy thus recom- mended by Government, actually passed a Bill, by which a Popish Bishop was to be endowed with an annual stipend out of the produce of those lands, which were granted by King George IlL, and confirmed by a solemn act of the British Parliament, for the main- tenance of a Protestant Clergy ! And, though the other branch of the Colonial Legislature was less accom- modating, and refused its consent to that measure ; yet a Bill has passed both those Houses, and will be laid before our own Parliament, previous to its receiving the Royal * See Despatches on creation of Rectories in Upper Canada, p. 445 : Lord Glenelg to Sir G. Arthur, 26 Dec. 1837. See also Lord Glenelg to Sir F.B.Head, 7 Sept. 1837 (Despatches to and from Sir F. Head, p. 93). t Copy of Despatch from Lord Glenelg to Sir G. Arthur, K.C.H., of 15 Nov. 1838 : — " As Her Majesty's Government see no reason to do>' jt the correctness of the Opinion delivered on this subject in 1819 by the Law Officers of the down, they do not consider it necessary to originate any proceedings on the subject before the Judges of England or the Privy Council." 16 Assent, by wliicli all the Clergy-reserve lauds are to be sold, and tlie proceeds invested in the Crown, and applied to purposes of Religion, generally, under the direction ol' the Imperial Parliament. This last particular of the enactment must give us hope : for before such appropriation shall be made, we cannot doubt, that Parliament will direct that some course be taken to ascertain the right construction of the phrase " a Protestant Clergy" in the Act which was designed to give effect to the pious munificence of Her Majesty's Royal Grandfather; and as little can we doubt, that, if it be found that the phrase in that Statute means, as we trust it means. Clergy of the Church of England, no talse liberality, no readiness to sacrifice principles to supposed expediency, will prevent the British Legislature from doing what Religion and justice shall be equally found to demand. Meanwhile, it is painful to contemplate the effects produced by the protracted conflict on this most mo- mentous subject, and the difficulties which in conse- quence have obstructed the operations of the Church in spreading the knowledge of Divine Truth through the Colony. By a return made to Government, and laid before Parliament, of the result of a census now in pro- gress (so far as these results were known), it a})peais That of between 200,000 and 300,000 persons, included in that return, almost a ninth were of no profession of Religion whatsoever,— and this, although sufficient lati- tude was taken: for, under the general title of religious bodies, there is a column not only for each of several uncouth denominations, such as Tunkers, Mennonites, and others, but also ,one for Deists, and another for Freethinkers ; yet the number of those who are oi no religious body, or profession, is nearly equal to the number of Roman Catholics. Thank God ! in spite -j^ ^ 17 ■-•^ ^ of all discouragement, the Cliurcli nearly doubles the number of any other denomination.* There is another official return, viz., of " Annual Pay- " ments to Religious Bodies, to ihich the Faith of Her " Majefitys Government is pledged" In it, we find that the annual payment to *Uhe Roman Catholic Bishop " and Priests" is about the same as to the "Presbyterian " Clergy of the Church of Scotland," and more than equal to what is pledged to the other two specified denominations, the " Presbyterians of the united Synod " of Upper Canada," and the " BritishWesleyan Metho- * In re/erence to this important particular, I may be permitted to no- tice the statements, or opinions, contained in two documents of rather an authoritative character : — 1. The Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, ordered to be printed 22nd July, 1827, says :— " With regard to the other religious sects, the Committee have found much difficulty in ascertammg the exact numerical proportions which they bear one to the others ; but the evidence has led them to believe, that neither the adherents of the Church of England, nnr those of the Church of Scotland, form the most numerous religious body within the Province of Upper Canada.'' 2. The Report of the Earl of Durham, ,tle " speaks : «///^'oi— atheists. They are ' in the world,' " but ' without God ;' living as it' there were no God " to bring them to an account for their deeds. Had " the Church of God done her duty; had she insisted" (God grant thai we may always insist ! ) " that religion, '* as it is the one thing needful, should also be the first " thing attended to in the education of youth ; had she ^' not consented to leave this all- important matter un- " performed, or performed by those who were not " shepherds of the Hock; had she inculcated the know- *' ledge of divine things with the same zealous care " with which she has insisted on the study of the na- ♦* tural sciences, — the state of our country would be " far different from what it is. Good men would not •' have cause to weep at the downhill course in which " all things are running. The good old way — the way " pursued by the Apostles — of insisting that men, with " all their house, should be baptized— all should be *• brought into the Church of God, and there trained in " the nurture and admonition of the Lord ; that children " should be fed with the milk, and the adults should *' partake of the strong meat of God's word : — this way, *' alas ! has heen neglected, and others, for a time more ** engaging, suited to men's vain feelings, have been " pursued. It was a a awful epoch when this began to " be exemplified in those who professed to conduct the *' destinies of the Church ; when men's ways were pre- •• ferred to the ways and sacraments of God. And it is heart-rending to behold now the consequences. A vaat " majority of our country are out of covenant with their " Maker ; and are uninstructed in the first rudiments of " the Christian faith ; not understanding even the terms " in which Religion is inculcated. If you call upon " them to repent of their sins— to learn their fallen <( <( «< (( ti (< (( (( (( stati; by nature, and to implore the mercy of (umI in Jesus Christ— they tell you they know notliing of the necessity of either ; they never bound themselves to any religion ; and never intend to do so. Most ot our youth cannot say the comnuindments ; and those who can have never heard them so expounded as to show the guilt of their transgression. They have been told there is some ahort way of ' getting reli- t'ion,' and they hope to find it without all this trouble."* * America is not the only country which testifies to the inefficacy of instruction, not based on religion, as an instrument of moral nnprovo- ment. Mr. H. Lytton Bulwer (a gentleman, who will not he charged with unwiUitiL'ness to take liberal views of any subject), m his work en- titled • France-Social, Literary, and Political.' has a chapter • on Crime " in which he makes some important references to M. Uuerry s ' Statistique Morale de la France.' I cite one or two passages :— '• In estimating the influence of instruction, M. Guerry takes, as the test of education, the list of those returned to the Minister of War, at the period of conscription, as able to read and write ; and making use ot the five divisions I have mentioned," (division of France into five re- gions: M. Guerry has used maps, as well as tables, which maps are tinted, the darkest tint indicating Xh% maximum of crime ; the lighter tint, the minimum; similar maps are given by him. showing the state ot education,) " he compares," says Mr. Bulwer, " the maps which paint the state of instruction, with those which depict the state of crime. From this comparison we see that, while the crimes against persons are the most frequent in Corsica, the provinces of the south-east, and Al- sace, where the people are well instructeJ, there are the fewest of these crimes in Berryi Limosin, and Britanny, where the people are the most ignorant. • ^ ^7 n -. Aofr... " Such is the case in respect to crimes agmnst the Person. As lor crimes against Property, it is almost invariably those pepartments tliat are the best informed, which are the most criminal. Should M. Gueiry not br. altogether wrong, then, this must appear certain,— that it instruc- tion do not increase crime, which may be a matter of dispute, there is no reason to believe that it diminishes it."— Vol. i. p. 182. Commending this passage to the attention of those who ascribe so much moral efficacy to mere instruction, 1 will present another passage from this centleman's book, still more worthy of their notice for the sound philosophic view indicated in it. In truth, Mr. Bulwer does not lay much stress on M. Guerry's tables, which may be as inconclusive as Mr. Porter represents them to be, without invalidating what fallows:—" It is not merely on account of M. Guerry's figures, that I think the conclusion at which ha here arrives probable and likely to be just. No one ever yet pretended to say that in Italy, where was the most civilisation during the middle aces, there was the least crime ; and I do not place much faith in the philosopher who pretends that the knowled«re which developes the pas- sions, is an instrument for their suppression, or that where there are the most desires, there is likely to be the most order and the most abstinence '2a From ull {ijiin'oaclies to 8ucli a state, may God, in lli.s mercy, protect this country ! Jiut, in order that in their L'i-atiflcatioii."-P. 184. I Rlully hail the authority of Mr. Lytton Bulwcr, in support of the j?rLnit principle, that nothing,' short of firm and sound religious lUilh can be an ellectual restraint ou tlie passions of men; liiat any scheme of instruction which does not include this indis- pensable and fundamental particular, is unworthy the name of oduca- But we have, 1 am sorry to say, similar confirmation of the same truth in this very Island ; ay, even in that part of this Island, which we have been accustomed to ret,'ard (and, in the main, I believe, justly to regard) us having most of instruction, not only secular but religious. Stdl, in one great section of the population of that country, the vast mass of human beings accumulated in Glasgow, there is fearful attestation of the same kind as M Guerry supplies from France. The following are parts of the evidence given before the Committee of the House of Com- mons on the combination of workmen. The witness is Mr. Alison, a gentleman, whose talents, station, and singular experience (as Sheritf of Lanarkshire) entitle him to the highest consideration. It appears I'rom his evidence (No. 'j;}urposes of Kducation generally, a Court of Equity would require, that it be applied for Education founded on Religion, the Religion of the Church of England. This is no antiquated doctrine, no obsolete principle, but a matter of every-day practice. A very few years ago, a late Master of the Rolls (Sir Thomas Plomer) recognised it, and decided accordingly. In the case of Attorney-General v. Dean and Canons of Christ Church, where was a devise in trust to constitute and support a Grammar School, with no other specification of the nature of the school, the learned judge, in pronouncing judgment, said " It is to be a Granmiar " School, and, in the absence of other evidence, the Court " can only establish it on the "principle of ^leligious " Education forming part of the plan, and that Reli- " gious Education being according to the laws of the " land." — Jacob's Reports, p. 482. Now, in the present case, there is a grant to the Crown by Act of Parliament, not, as in former years, '• for building School-houses," but "iorPublic Education " in Great Britain in 1839." The terms of this grant must be construed to be for purposes of Public Edu- cation, on the principle just stated, viz. " Religious Edu- " cation forming part of the plan, and that Religious " Education being according to the laws of the land." Here, then, we have found a duty, which the Com- mittee of the Privy Council, acting for the Crown, are bound to observe in administering the funds granted by Parliament to the Crown, and placed by the Crown in their hands. This duty they must bear carefully in mind in all their proceedings. They have no right — it i i •r> 35 is notwitliin their legal competence— to divert, in Eng- land,* any portion of the Grant, from Education founded on tlie Religion which jdone the law recognises as the Religion of England. Whhin this limitation, they may exercise their discretion ; — heyond it, if they venture to extravagate — if, for instance, they shall dare to esta- blish, with the moneys thus granted, a Model School for Roman Catholics — they will become guilty of a High Crime jmd Misdemeanor — they will place themselves within the peril of the Law, from which a majority of two in the House of Connnons may not always be found able and willing to bear them harmless. I perceive, indeed, from the official pamphlet before me, that the Committee does not assent to the Law laid down by Sir Thomas Plomer; but that a per- fectly new principle is introduced by them into our jurisprudence — a principle which, I suspect, will hardly be recognised in Westminster Hall, and, therefore, may be found a little dangerous, if relied upon in Downing- street. That I may do it justice, I will cite it in the words of its author : — " One principle our laws require *' should be preserved inviolate under all circumstances, " viz., that the established Church shall suffer no dtlri- ment" (we would have been thankful for this admis- sion, had not the learned writer proceeded to explain) *' but should hold its position atnong the religious " denominations of the Comitry, as the Church Avhose " head is the Sovereign, and whose institutions are inter- " woven with those of the temporal power." That is, the Church is one of the various " religious denomina- "tions of the country," distinguished indeed by having " the Sovereign for its head," and by having " its ** institutions interwoven with those of the temporal * What they are bound to do in the other part of " Great Britain" is not now in question. D '•>. 36 power'' — p. 88. What may be the exact meaning of this last member of the sentence, I must profess myself utterly unable to conjecture. J5nt it is j)erfectly ch*ar, that it is not intended to include any right of the Church to preference in the contemplation of the Law, as being the Church. It is also plain, that this learned Connnentator deems it a })rinciple of the Law of Eng- land, that no Church is any longer to be especially regarded as the Church — that the one heretofore called " the Church of England" has really no right to any such exclusive title ; for all Churches, and all Sects, Avhicli may be acknowledged by any of Her INLijesty's subjects, are alike called, by a new and liberal style, "the religious denominations of England," and have all an equal right to support and maintenance from the State. If there could be any doubt that this is part of the meaning of the sentence which I have cited (for, I repeat, I am utterly incapable of even guessing the whole), the doubt would be removed by looking back to the immediately preceding page, where we find the principle asserted in a more luminous and impressive form. " No Government could long exist in this coun- '' try which should either neglect the legal right which " the Established Church has to e,vpect the protection and " support of the Executive Government" (how ample this concession !) " or which, on the other hand, should " refuse to admit that a large body of Her Majesty a " Subjects who dissent from the Established Church *' have A LEGAL RIGHT TO AN EQUAL DISTRIBUTION ftf " all the secular advantages derivable from a Govern- " ment supported by the public Funds."' p. 87. Incre- dible as it must appear, this is gravely put forth, as the Law of the Land, by a Committee of Her Majesty's Privy Council ! — happily, not the Judicial Committee. Now, upon this, which is really the pith and marrow J ! 0» I 37 of the whole (loeiimeiit, " the phiiii exposition of the " Committee's principles," I must take leave to make one very obvious remark. The writer says, " No Government *' coukl long exist in this country, which should refuae to ** admit" a certain alleged " legal right of Her Majesty's " subjects dissenting from the Established Church;" and this is said, as if he thought it a matter of choice, con- sideration, and discretion for the Government, whether they will make or refuse the admission. But surely it ought not to be necessary to remind him, or any one else, that the Government has no discretion whatever in such a matter. Whether an alleged " legal right" exist, or not, is a question of law. If it exist, it is the duty of Government to give effect to it ; — if it does not exist, it is equally the duty of Government to resist all claim to it — a duty, which an honest Government would dis- charge, be the consequence, as concerns their permanence as a Government, what it may. One thing more an honest Government would do. If they have a doubt on the question, they would call on the Law Officers of the Crown to solve the doubt, and to make themselves re- sponsible for their solution. V/ill the Committee of Privy Council take this very plain, easy, and most con- stitutional course, and then act on the result ? It would save them a world of trouble — and give perfect satis- faction to all whom they ought to wish to satisfy. Till this is done, I shall be excused, if, adhering to Sir T. Plomer's judgment of the Law, I venture to call on the Committee, if they are sincere in their endeavour for an effective scheme of National Education, to lay their foundation in the National Religion. Having laid that foundation broad and deep, let them build on it as largely, and as widely as they will — inviting all, com- pelling none. For instance, to meet the most obvious case, let no child be compelled either to attend Divine Service in tlie Chuveh, if his parents object to it on an m allc^^ed scruple of conscience, or lo learn the Cute- cliism, or jinytliiniij else to which the parents may ohject on a similar ^^round, in any school maintained wholly or partially by aid from the State. If the Committee refuse to take some such course as this, they avow that their claim for " Her Majesty's subjects who dissent from the Established Churcli" is a claim, not of conscience, but of ambition : — that the contest is not, whether the children of the poor shall be taught, and well-taught ; but, whether the teaching shall be that of the Church or of the Conventicle— whether Papists, Unitarians, Jumpers, Ranters, Ir- vingites. Socialists, shall not henceforth be recognised, as having " a right"— be it "a legal right" or not- "to an equal distribution" of the privilege of educating, and king paid by the State for educating, the rising generation of Englishmen :— this being one of " the " secular advantages derivable from a Government sup- •' ported by the public funds." And here it may be well to observe, that it is a very gross fallacy to speak of violating the rights of con- science, by holding out to the poor a system of Educa- tion based on a Religion which they do not acknow- ledge. Do the vast majority of those, whose ignorance is depicted by the President of the Council, or the late Home Secretary, in colours so fearful, yet so true— do they feel any conscientious repugnance to the National Religion ? Do they acknowledge the superiority of any of the numerous forms of Dissent ? Do they think about these things ? Do they care for, or understand, their differences ? Nothing like it. The very case put for- ...^^.i iv.r fi./^c/^ ,>rvl.l^ T.oivlc unrl hv flip naTnT>hlet of the Conunittee, rests on the; besotted ignorance of the great " mass of the population in the manufacturing districts, i I M 39 ♦* iiiid greiit towns,"- oil the total Jibsciicc oliill conscious- iit!ss of the value orilcligiojii among tlicin,— on tlu' dead- ness of their moral sensibility,— on their almost " bru- "tal" indifference to everything but the objects of sense. Let us take, first, the description given by the Lord President of the state of " those great inauufacturing " classes" (I use his own words) " whom it is the nature ♦♦ of our social system to accumulate, but for whom, "unhappily, it has not hitherto been a part of our social *• system to provide the means of Education." " In " Manchester, Leeds, York, and other great towns, par- *' ticularly in the North of England, there has been *' revealed an amount of ignorance most disgraceful to a •' civilized nation. It is shown, that in four of the great " manufacturing towns there are 80,000 children grow- " ing up without the shadow of Education, and that of " the grown-up population of Manchester, and the sur- " rounding places, there is only something like the pro- " portion of one-fourth that can either read or write, the " remainder being in that condition of hopeless igno « ranee, which prepares the way for those ebullitions " of passion which are the result of ignorance, and " which threaten the pea^e and security of society."— '* In these 80,000 uninstructed children now growing « out of infancy, as it appeared, in three or four only " of the great towns of the North, without any " Creedy if it were not a farce to talk of Creeds in *♦ connexion with persons so ignorant, your Lordships " may see the rising Chartists of the next age."— Z/or^ Lansdownes Speech, pp. 15 — 17. Let us next attend to Lord John Russell. He gives us two painfully interesting Reports from Chaplains of gaols. The Chaplain of the gaol at Lancaster, in his Report for 1838, says, that of 1129 prisoners, ^seven only were familiar with the Holy Sciipiurcs, and con- ■ •to veisiint with the j)riii('ii»los of Holigion — 510 wvav quite ignonint of the simplest truths — thou^^^li 91)5 could say the Lord's Prayer, not more than 20 or 30 liad habitually attended any place of Divine Worship. " This estimate," says the Report, " will be almost un- " disputed by all those who have observed the almost " general desertion of the house of God by that portion " of the working population which consists of males *' in the prime of life ; and I think that, if the subject " were investigated, it would appear, that this desertion "is in the ratio of the density of population. Village " congregations would be found least obnoxious to this " remark, and those of large towns most so." Upon this the Noble Lord very reasonably asks, '' Is not " this a dreadful peculiarity in the state of society ? Is " it not dreadful to think, that where there are the most " criminals, and where the population is the densest, " and where there ought to be as complete education as " possible, the house of God is deserted by that i)or- " tion of the population which consists of males in the " prime of life?" And he concludes his comments by deploring "the danger of promoting practical infi- " delity by total ignorance*'* The same Noble Lord, in his Letter to the Lord President, says, " The Reports of the Chaplains of gaols " show, that to a large number of unfortunate prisoners " a knowledge of the fundamental truths of natural and *' revealed Religion has never been imparted." And a most unhappy confirmation of this statement is produced by the Committee's pamphlet. The Re- port of the Chaplain of the County gaol at Bedford, in 1838, says, " that their great leading character- " istic was ignorance, heathcnhh ignorance of the Lord John Russelis Speech, pp. 14, la. 41 *• sinijilcst truths." " As to the condition, niontully " and nionilly, of his unh5i|)j)y (•h}irj;'t', hi) regretted *' to say it couhl scarcely he more ignorant or dei^raded, " It was his conviction that no pen coukl depict, in " coh)nrs sutliciently dark, the moral and spiritual igno- " ranee and dehasement of the vastly greater numherot' " those uniiappy heings who pass through the prisons." The Chaplain of the County gaol at Warwick thus r(!ports, in 1S36 : — " With regard to those important '* parts of Education, Religion and morality, generally " speaking, no instruction whatever appears to have " heen given to them : for, in a vast tnajorit^ of in- " stances, the persons who come to prison are utterly '• i^norcmt both of the simplest truths (fRelifrion, and " of the plainest precepts of morality." The Pamphlet proceeds : — " Many shnilar extracts might be given " from the Reports of other Chaplains of gaols, all con- " tirmatory of the brutal state of ignorance exhibited " by almost all the offenders who come under their ** observation."* Such is the case, the appalling, the irresistible case, made out by the two Noble Lords and their official organ, on which they demand of Parliament funds to enable them to improve the state of primary Education amongst us. But what shall we say, wdien, on seeking to find a remedy for so much crime and misery in a new scheme of Public Education, these very Noble Lords object to found their scheme on what they themselves believe to be the true Religion—on what their Sove- reign has sworn to maintain, to the utmost of her power, as the true Religion, — and object to do so, lest, forsooth, by doing it they should violate the rights of conscience, and " the principles of civil and religious liberty ?" If * Recent Measures, p. 13. j 42 siicli an objection were made, on such an occasion, by ordinary nien, it would be difficult to avoid asking, whether it proceeded from hypocrisy or from folly. But, coming from personages in so high place, and of so high qualities, of whom neither hypocrisy nor folly can be suspected, 1 will adopt the language of one of themselves, and will ask him, in his own words, " is it not a farce to talk of creeds," and the principles of religious liberty, " in connexion with persons so very " ig^norant " — the very stress of whose case it is, that they have no creed, no preference for any Religion, no knowledge of any religious or moral truth ? On this point let me again refer to the testimony of the Lord President, given to us in the very same speech. "Who will venture to say," his Lordship demands, " that if schools for general, moral, and religious in- ** struction had been established in Manchester, in *' Liverpool, in Bury, in Salford, in Birmingham, and •* in our other large commercial and manufacturing " towns, the great feeders of our penal colonies ; and *' that if the population of those districts had been *' trained in those schools in good moral and religious " principles, no matter whether those principles were " those of the Church of England, or of some sect *♦ dissenting from it, — who, I ask, will venture to say, " that many might not have escaped from their present *' cruel fate?*" After this, I may appear to be doing injustice to the Noble Lord, if, by adding a single word, 1 seem to in- timate a doubt, whether he will be ready to act on his own heart-stirring appeal to the feelings and judgment of others — whether he will take measures to secure to the working classes in those vast receptacles of debased 1 i * Lord Lansdowno's Speech, p. 17. 4^' o 1 •4 I hunitinity — those great " feeders cf our penal colonies," — tlie very boon which he claims for them as their due — the very remedy which he himself prescribes, as alone able to recover them from that state of moral putrefac- tion which he so eloquently depicts — whether, in short, he Avill give them schools, in which their children shall be " trained in good moral and religious principles." The Lord President says, *' no matter whether those " principles be the principles of the Church of England, " or of some sect dissenting from it." Why, then, if he thinks it " no matter" which is taken, it is not too much to ask, that he give the measuring-cast to his own Church, particularly, as the oath of his Royal Mistress, and the law of the land, happen to be make-weights in the same scale. If he refuse, it will require all our ac- customed respect for him to keep down a rising suspi- cion that neither the rights nor the wrongs of the poor, nor }mblic morality, nor national honour, no, nor na- tional saiety, has so large a share of his regards, as the political influence of certain parties, who might object to purchasing even the deliverpuce of their country at the price of doing justice to the Church. Will any one deny the correctness of the picture, drawn by the Noble Marquis, of the moral condition of many parts of the manufacturing districts — of their Heathenism — nay, worse than Heathenism,* (for Hea- thens are commonly under some moral influences, which tame and humanize them) ? Or will any one dispute about the cause, to which this hideous state of things is to be attributed ? We have another witness attesting the same or similar facts, and telling us what is the * Mr. Alison's Evidence (No. 2418, &c.) shows a stale of morals in Glasgow, from which Heathens would Uirn with disgust. Have wc a right to hope that matters arc belter in all of our English manufacturing towns ? 44 cause — that it is the exclusion of the Church from those districts, or its most inadequate establishment within tiiem, which has mainly caused the evils and dangers which we all deplore. Lord John Russell is that wit- ness : on a very recent occasion, he not only confirmed and enforced his Noble Colleague's statement, but founded on it a demand, which nothing short of stern and irresistible necessity could have wrung from him. On the 2nd of August last, he came down to the House of Commons, and demanded a large increase of the army to meet and avert the dangers, which the " not " only lamentable, but appalling" condition of the ma- nufacturing population threatened. And to what did he ascribe that condition ? — To a state of society " which had not the usual concomitants " of a densely-peopled region — without sufficient means " of instruction, without sufficient places of worship." It had not schools ^ it had not churches.* Ml * In fearful confirmation of the Noble Lord's statement, I subjoin tlie following Abstract, compiled from the Second Report of the Church Commission (ordered to be printed, March 10, 1836). P. 6. P. 6. P. 7. P. 7. Pp. 6, 7. In London and its suburbs, there are 34 parishes Souis. or districts, with a population amounting to 1,137,000 In the Diocese of Chester, (or rather in Lanca- shire alone) there are 38 parishes or districts, containing an aggregate of 816,000 In the Diocese of York, there are 20 parishes or districts, with an aggregate of 402,000 In the Diocese of Lichfield and Coventry, there are 16 parishes or districts, with an aggregate of . . . 235,000 2,590,000 The amount of Church-room provided for the above, includ- ing the Sittings in Proprietary Chapels (many of which have no particular districts assigned to them, and in which, there- fore, the parochial economy of the Established Church cannot be earned into full effect), is 301,382 Sittings. Computing, as do the Committee of the Metropolis Church Fund (a) that one-half of the population are able to attend public worship, provi- (") Sfe their Second Report, page 9. \ 1 45 ' To meet tlie pressing danger, tlie House voted an in- crease of more than 5000 men, at a permanent cost of 140,000/. or 150,000/. per annum, enough to maintain 500 or 600 ministers of God's Word— Heralds of the Gospel of Peace ! How much more must follow, is known only to Him, whose vengeance does not always sleep. Meanwhile, " our sin has found us out." Hap- pily, it is not only a sin, but, what statesmen are more ashamed of, it is also a blunder. For, even as a ques- tion of finance and police, we have now learned, that it is safer, ay, and cheaper, to do our duty to God, and to our poor countrymen. " A population without the usual " concomitants of a densely -peopled region—without suf- " licient means of instruction — without sufficient places •* of worship !" Whose fault is that ? Not the special fault of the noble Lord and of his colleagues ;— it is the fault of almost all the Governments, and of all the people of this land, during the last half-century. But whose will he the fault, whose will be the sin, if immediate mea- sures are not taken to redress the enormous wrongs which our national avarice — called by politicians " our " social system" — has inflicted upon the bodies, and alas ! upon the souls, of hundreds of thousands of our fellow-countrymen ? Can they be redressed by a sys- tem whic^- disclaims for the Government any duty be- yond promoting the " grand object of secular improve- " ment " — nay, whose commissioned expositor pro- claims that "the 6o/e means " of redressing our moral evils, is, to make those guilty, but most injured men, not Christians, but political economists ? In the name of outraged reason, let us implore the Noble Lords, sion is here made for 602,762. This is the number for which provision of Church-room is made, leaving unprovided 1,987,238. _ . If there be (which is an extravagant supposition) as large provision m Dissenting places of worship, even thus there will remain 1,384,476 souls (a word which alone speaks volumes to a Christian) in 108 out of 13,000 parishes, without access to the ordinary means of grace ! Ilj 46 and the other Members of the Coiniuiltee, who are charged Avith the high trust of dispensing the grant of Parliament for the education of the people, to cast off the trammels of a godless and heartless theory — to take counsel, not from the bigots of liberalism, but from their own feelings, their own principles, their own fear of God, and love of man. Let them stand forth, as they ought, the friends of the poor, the followers of their Redeemer, the deliverers of their country ! Be this as it may, enough within the last few months has been seen and heard to render a repetition of much of by-gone sophistry and misr(»presentation impossible. Henceforth, no statesman will rise in his place in Par- liament — no man who values his reputation for veracity will stand forth without a mask, and say, or insinuate, that it is the Church, the exclusive spirit, the tyrannous pretensions, the sordid claims, of the Church — or, as it is more cunningly worded, " the feuds of sects, and the " interests of bodies incompetent effectually to deal with " the national question ; " — no man iu the light of day will give utterance to the assertion, that this it is whicli arrests the march of moral improvement amongst us, and " robs the people of England of the heritage which the " Government, after periods of ruinous deprivation, was " about to restore to them.' No man Avill venture to put his name to this, or to a charge still more atrocious than this — a charge as yet muttered only, not pro- nounced — that the Church, by i)erpetuating "that " wide-spread and demoralizing ignorance which para- " lyses all the healthful influences of society, if it does " not convert its elements into engines of nmtual de- ♦' struction," has placed England under a worse than Popish interdict — for, " if marriages could no longer be *' celebrated, if the dead were left unburied, and the " Churches closed," it were no greater grievance, than '4 4? the Church of England now inflicts by her obstinate assertion of her exclusive privileges ? No man, I repeat, will venture to put his name to this shameless insinua- tion. No ! It is a foul and wicked calumny, which none but an anonymous libeller would dare to put forth. Such a one has put it forth, and under very high sanc- tion. Clad in the mantle of official authority, bearing on his vizor the stamp of the " Committee on Public '• Education" — employed "on Her Majesty's Service" — and vouched for by the Seal of the " Privy Council" itself — thus accoutred, thus accredited, he has gone to his unhallowed work, — in the name of the Lord Presi- dent of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, —of the Lord Keeper of Her Majesty's Privy Seal. — of one of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State,— of the late and present Chancellors of Her Majesty's Exchequer, — of the Master of Her Majesty's Mint,— and lastly of Her Majesty's Judge Advocate ! All this ought to be incredible. Alas ! it is only the latest (God grant it may be the last) outrage com- mitted on His Church, under the authority of those, whose most sacred duty it is to niaintain and protect that Church to the utmost of their own and of their Sovereign's power. INly friends, my brethren, I have dwelt at greater length, and with more Avarmth, on this subject here, than the time or the place permitted when I addressed you in person. But, ['* is there not a cause ? " For myself, in the deep of my heart, I believe, that on this question of " Public Education " — on the principles which the nation shall now recognise and adopt, as the basis of instruction — ay, and on the agencies which it 48 shall employ for siiperintending the work — depend mainly the future spiritual and moral character of the English people; and, by consequence (let political economists think of it as they may), the strength and security of the British Empire. In this great, this holy cause, we, the clergy, are bound, by every consideration of personal responsibility and ministerial faithfulness, to be up and stirring— to be jealous for God's honour — to prove ourselves in earnest, and anxious for the souls of men. We must show to all the world that we nideed " have in remembrance into how high a dio-- iiity, "and to how Aveighty an office and charge, we are called, "to be messengers, imtchmen, and stewards of the Lord." We may not, we dare not, silently and calmly witness the transfer to others of the most important, the most interesting, the most cheering, because, with God's blessing, the most fruitful, and most effectual part of our pastoral care, the feeding of the Lunbs of Christ. The great question of the day is, who shall feed those lambs ; but in it is involved an incalculably greater, with tvhatfuod shall they be fed. We have lived to hear the world's wisdom superseding, even in this Christian land, the word of God. We have lived to be told that " secular instruction" is the true remedy for that corruption, which adhereth to " every *' one that is naturally engendered of the offspring of " Adam"— the true security for the individual's virtue, and the nation's greatness. We have lived to hear this monstrous dogma, not Avhispered, but taught— nor taught only in the schools of the infidel, but proclaimed from the highest place, and set forth with the highest sanction. At such a time, our duty is manifest ; our path, if not easy, at least is clear. We nuist not only refuse to give our countenance to the unholy project— •• k»» 49 T n V still more to bear any part in the execution of it ; but we nuist expose and resist it in every lawful, every honest way. We must raise our voice in respectful, but fearless remonstrance. We must call on our i)eo- ple to give effect to that remonstrance, by the lirm, and therefore peaceful, exercise of their own power ; warning them, that power carries with it a corresponding duty. Above all, we must " pray always with all prayer and '• supplication in the spirit" to our heavenly Master, im- ploring his gracious support of his own ministers, in what we humbly, but conlidently, hope is his own cause. So, with God's blessing, we shall finally exult in seeing the Church and people whom we serve and love, not " spoiled" of their glorious inheritance " through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition " of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after " Christ." Among those who will most rejoice in our success, will be some (let us hope, all) of them, who are now most prominent in the work which we deplore. I am unwilling to mix with matter of so high public interest anything which concerns myself. But it is part of the public question to illustrate the character of the official pamphlet to which I have so frequently referred. In it,* I am cited as having in the House of Lords declared my assent to the principle, that the duty of the State is limited to the care of " secular instruc- *'tion,'' as contradistinguished from " spiritual and re- " ligious." It is added, " upon the principle thus " elucidated by the discussions in Parliament, we trust '* that all parties are now agreed," With hardihood, or oscitancy, not often witnessed, the writer piufcsses to find the evidence of his assertion in a speech of mine, * Recent Measiiroa, p. 56. E 50 the whole tenor of which most explicitly and strongly nffirnied the contrary principle.* There is another case, illustrative of the authority of that Publication in a question of fact, which I must not omit to notice, more especially, as it is connected with an unfortunate, but mischievous misapprehension, which has been exhibited in another quarter. At pp. 69 — 74, it is stated, that in the Regulations contained in the Minute of the Committee of Privy Council of 11th April, 1839, (one of which was, that " Religious Instruction be 'considered as general and " special,") " the views of the Committee appear in ** all their leading features to be so strictly in accord- " ance with those of that able and pious Prelate, Daniel " Wilson, the Bishop of Calcutta, as developed in re- " gulations which he proposed to the Committee of " the Martiniere, that they feel bound to state the " most material parts of those regulations." Now, from this, any man of plain understanding must conclude, that the Bishop of Calcutta '* proposed ** those regulations," according to his own " views" of what was best and fittest for the occasion. This is made stronger by what follows : — " It was the wish of the Bishop of Calcutta to have " founded this institution on the express doctrines and " discipline of the Church of England, only ; but, find- •' ing that the intentions of the founder were, that the " benefits of the institution should be extended to all " persons, without distinction of Creed, he proposed, " and strenuously advocated, the plan described in the " Report:' * This gave rise to a correspondence with Lord J. Russell, which I have much pleasure in placing in the Appendix, No. I. 51 itr Such is the stutement in the Committee's Pamphlet. But what is the fact? — Bishop Daniel Wilson, in whose praises I pjladly concur with these writers, was associated with twelve other Governors in the manage- ment of the new Institution, called, from its founder. General Martin, La Martiniere. It had long been fully understood, that the Institution should be con- ducted on the principles of the Church of England, and, especially, that no Minister of any other Church, or Religious denomination, should be admitted to its government. But, soon after the arrival of Mr. Macaiilay in Bengal, two vacancies, which had occurred in the list of Governors, were filled by the appointment (contrary to the strong reclamation of the Bishop) of the Rev. Dr. St. Leger, an Irish Roman Catholic Vicar Apostolic of the Pope, and the Rev. James Charles, Chaplain of the Scotch Presbyterian Establishment. This took place in May, 1835, — and, in the following month, a proposition was submitted to the Governors for their approbation, containing a body of rules, by which no Clergyman was to be Master or Teacher of the School, and no Religious Instruction was to be allowed to be given in it, except on such points as were not contro- verted amonfr Christians, reserving all special instruction to be given out of school-hours by Clergymen of the Church of England, or Ministers of some other Com- munion. It was, in short, to be similar to the Irish Government-School system, and to that which was laid down in a despatch from the Colonial Secretary, for all schools in Australia, which are maintained at the public charge : " Limiting the daily and ordinary " Religious Instruction to those leading doctrines of " Christianity, and those practical precepts, in which ** all Christians may cordially asree"* * Lord Glenelg's Despatch to Sir R. Bourke, 30th Nov. 1835, p. 16. E r2 52 Here Wii have the " i^'oiicral religious instructioji" indicated in the Minute of the Connuittee of 11th of April, 1839; "whose views in ail their leading- fea- " tures ai)pear to be so strictly in accordance! with those ♦* of the liishop of Calcutta, as developed in the regula- '• tions which lie proposed." Let us next see how the Bishop proved his accordance with these views of the Connuittee. He began by o-iving his warm resistance to the proposition, which would have carried this very plan of" general religious instruction" into effect. He addressed a letter to Sir C. T. Metcalfe, Governor-General of Bengal, who was also President of the Governors of La Martiniere — in which letter he argued against the proposition, as contrary to all right principle and ex- perience, as well as to the intention of the founder and the Decree of the Court. This letler, though it failed to obtain the votes of the majority of his col- leagues, seven of whom (against six) supported the proposition, was yet too powerful to be disregarded : — it did not prevent the passing of the proi)osition, ])ut it stopped the execution of it. A compromise took place ; and the lowest terms to which the Bishop, after claiming much higher, could be induced to accede, and which, after nmch discussion between himself. Dr. St. Leger, and Mr. Charles, were finally adopted, are those which are exhibited in the Committee's Pamphlet. Such is the foundation for the assertion, that the Bishop of Calcutta's " views" are those whicdi are " develoiied in these regulations — which he proposed "and strenuously " advocated ;" but of which he thus writes himself in " his •'own vindication," to which the Pamphlet refers :— " I think it right in justice to the Indian Episcopal *' Church, to observe, that I laboured strenuously to " have the foundation of this institution laid on the 53 " «'Xj)ress doctrines hikI discipline of the Cluirch of " Eiiirliind only; but, tuilini'- in this, I sncceeded with " f(reat difflcidty in prevoitwjr what is termed the " InNh Gitverument School Syateinjrom bein^ adopted, " and in estahlisliini;* in it,s utead ull the ^reat doctrines " of redemption, as held ])y the iive mahi divisions of the " Christian world — the English, the Scotch, the Roman " Catholic, tlie Greek, and the Armenian Chnrches — '* as our fundamental principles." Now, I niiiy be permitted to ask, whether the " general religious instruction" of the Conmiittee be not the same, or virtually the siime, as that very " Irish Government School System," which the Bishop ostles' time there *' have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's •' Church,^ — Bishops, Priests, and Deacons "—-" that no " man might presume to execute any of them, except, " having been first called, tried, examined, he were also " by public prjiyer, with im})osition of hands, approved " and admitted thereunto by lawful authority." Oi' Imijoxilion nj] lands, he.e declared to be necessary 1 6 1 to valid Ordination, it is not easy to conceivt; why the Church shouhl thus declare it to be neccasury, unless because it holds, in common with all acknowledged branches of the Catholic Church to tlie time of the Reformation, tliat the same form of Ordination — in other words, of giving the Holy Ghost for the offices of the Christian Ministry — which was observed by the Apostles themselves, was also, under the direction of the Holy Ghost, transmitted by them for the perpetual o1)servance of the Church, in admitting to the same Holy Orders, which they themselves conferred. And as to the "lawful authority" spoken of in the same sentence, it is manifestly implied in what loUows, that it resides in Bishops, and in none but Bishops. For the Church there speaks of all as lawful Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, who are consecrated or ordained ac- cording to its own form, or " who have had formerly JBJ/?i*- co/>«/ Ordination or Consecration;" and none other. Is it still doubtful, whether it be, according to the teaching of our Church, by Divine institution, that Bishops hold this jjower of conferring the commission on others ? Refer to the Office of Consecration of Bishops — read there the Charge to the Congregation — "first to " fall to prayer" before the Archbishop '' admits and " i;c aft<»i' Hnvinrr pncfa£r*^d before God and man, that he will use this form of words in administering i 07 JJaptism — aiul afhM' liaviiij^, in accordanct^ vvitli tliat cn^aiijenient^ continued to use it during th<' vvliole of his niiniisterial service — can yet deny or dispute the position that our Church maintains, that always to infants, and to adults rightly receiving, regeneration is given in Jiaptisni, and, so far as man is authorized to pronounce, in Baptism only, — might appear incredible, if the experience of more than 200 years had not, unhappily, furnislied us Avith too many instances to the contijiry. Our own times, indeed, and 1 nuist not forbear to add, our own Diocese, have been said to furnish more than one instance of disingenuousness of anothcM- kind. It is reported, (erroneously, I hope,) that there are persons, even among our Brethren, who, in despite of tlieir engj'genunts, take upon themselves to omit, or garbh,', portions of the Office of Baptism, in order to avoid expressions, a\ hich their conscience, it should seem, is too tender to use, luough not too tender to promise to use. Whether the penalties of humai' law be likely to restrain any who in such a matter can set at nought tbeir most s.icrt obligations to God, I know not; but it may be \ ell to statt the injunction of the Thirty - eighth Canon : " If any JNlinister, after he has subscribed, *' shall omit to use the form of prayer, or .my of the " orders, prescribed in the Communion, let him be " suspended ; and if, after a month, he do not reform and " submit himself, let him be exccmmuaicated ; and then, "if he shall no submit himself wi in the space of " another month, let him be deposed fron^ the ministry." The penalties of this Cancn I should feel it my duty, however painful, to enforce, in any case in which by (hie proof it may be shown that they are incurred." i 11= piiiiieu ictvci, ucaiiitj^ iTi: Xieau D ualutr, iiaTiij'^ pi-w-jrr^sesl liiat he thus corrupts the office of Baptir,ia, 1 called ou him at ray Visitation, in the presence of (he Archdeacon, and the Churchwardens of bis V 2 68 And here, I cannot forbear entreatinj^ you all to follow the directions of the Huhric, as in other respects, so particularly in rehition to the time of administering Baptism, " either immediately after the Second Lesson " at Morning Prayer, or else immediately after the Se- '* cond Lesson at Evening Prayer." Those of your congregation, who know and consider what Baptism is — a sacrament — a holy mystery, insti- tuted and ordained by our Lord himself, in which He is in a special manner present, and by which H(^ worketh a new creation in the soul of him who receives it, making him to be part of his own body, and so to be entitled to an inheritance in his Heavenly Kingdom — all, I say, who know and consider this (as all ought to know and consider it), however often Baptism may recur, will witness it with awe, and reverence, and holy joy ; and will join most gladly in the prayers and praises, which are offered up to God, at the working of so mighty a change in anyone of those for whom our Saviour shed his blood. Nor would it be easy to devise any means more likely to be effectual, in awakening the thoughtless, or enlightening the ignorant, than thus to remind them, by the Baptism of others, both of the new birth which was once vouchsafed to themselves, and of the new life to which they were thereby pledged. But then, in order to insure these good effects, it is manifestly neces- sary, that you should not seldom bring the real nature and blessed efficacy of this Sacrament to the attention of your people. / ^ parish, to avow himself, if he thought fit, the Author of the letter (cau- tioning him that the avowal might be used against him). As he declined making this avowal, I charged the Churchwardens to note his practice in ministering Baptism, and to wake Pruaciitinont, if he omits any portion of the Office. ■ ^ Let me now say a lew words of the other Sacra- ment ; — Wlien any of us speak of this great mystery in terms best suited to its high spiritual nature ; when, for in- stance, we speak of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Holy Eucharist, there is raised a cry, as if we were symbolizing with the Church of Kome, and as if this presence, because it is real, can be nothing else than the gross carnal corporeal presence indicated in the doctrine of Transubstantiation. Now here, as with respect to Baptism, I will not argue the point, but will merely refer to the language of our Church in those authorized declarations of its doctrine to which we have assented, and in those formularies which we have both expressly approved and solemnly engaged to use. It is very true, that none of these declarations or fornmlaries use the phrase " real presence ;" and there- fore, if any should attempt to impose the use of that phrase as necessary, he would be justly open to censure for requiring what the Church does not require. But, on the other hand, if we adopt the phrase, as not only aptly expressing the doctrine of the Church, but also as commended to our use by the practice of the soundest divines of the Church of England, in an age more dis- tinguished for depth, as well as soundness, of theology, than the present — such as Archbishops Bramhall,* Sharp,! and Wake,;}: (all of whom do not only express their own judgment, but also are witnesses of the general judgment of the Church in, and before, their * Bramhall's Works, tome i. p. 15. + Sharp's Sermons, vol. vii. p. 368. X Wake's Discourse on the Holy Eucharist, Chap. 2. " Of the Real Presence acknowledged by the Church of iiijgiand." " The bread and wine, after consecration, are the real, but the spiritual and mystical body of Christ:' 70 h days ; "No genuine son of the Church of England,'' s m :ij| f' I*' I'll'! fii M Ki " order observed by J^isliop Hall in his treatise on ' tin; "Old Religion,'" whose Protestantism, they add, "is '• unquestionable," and is claimed, therefore, as a voucher for their own. But, looking to particulars, I lament to see them " following, indeed, the order of ** Bishop *' Hall/' but widely departing from his truly Protest- ant sentiments, on more than one important article. First, of" the worship of images" (for so that great Divine* justly designates what they more delicately call " the honour paid to images"), they say only, that it is " dangerous in the case of the uneducated, that is, of " the great part of Christians."* But Bishop Hall treats it, as not merely '* dangerous " to some, but as sinful in all ; as " against Scripture ;" " the Book of God is full of his indignation against this practice ;" — and " against reason." " What a madness is it," says he, " for a living man to stoop unto a dead stock ! " Next, of "the invocation of Saints," these writers say, that it " is a dangerous practice, as tending to giv(S " often actually giving, to creatures the honour and re- " liance due to the Creator alone."— p. 12, But how does the good Bishop, whom they profess to follow, speak on this same point ? " Theae foul " superstitions" , says he, " are not more heinous, than *' new — and such as whereon we have justly o^- *' horred to take part with the practisers of them." Again, " This doctrine and practice of the Romish " Invocation of Saints, both as new and erroneous, *' against Scripture and reason, we have justly rejected ; " and are thereupon ejt^cted, as unjustly. |" Again, I lament to read their advice to those who are contending for the Truth against Romanists, that, " the controversy abo.it Transubstantiation be kept in ** the background ; because it cannot well be discussed * Bishop Hall's Works, 8vo. vol. ix. p. 340. l- Ibid, pp. 305, 308. 1 I 79 ** in words at all without the sacrifice of godly fear:"* — as if that tenet were not the abundant source of enor- mous practical evils, which the faithful Advocate of the Truth is bound to expose ; in particular, of the extrava- gant exaltation of the Romish priesthood, which seems to have been its primary object— and, still worse, of that which is its legitimate and necessary consequence, the adoration of the Sacramental Bread and Wine, which our Church denounces as " Idolatry to be abhorred of " all faithful Christians." I lament, too, the encouragement given by the same writers to the dangerous practice of prayer for the dead. They disclaim, indeed, the intention of giving such encouragement, and I doubt not the sincerity of their disclaimer. But to state that this practice " is a " matter of sacred consolation to those who feel them- *' selves justified in entertaining it"t — (and all, they seem to suggest, may "feel themaehes justified," for it is " warranted by the early Church") : — to say, further, that it is " a solemn privilege to the mourner" — " a dictate of human nature"— nay, that it " may be " implanted by the God of Nature, may be the voice "of God within us:"— to say all this, is surely an " encouragement" of the practice so characterized, which is very feebly counterbalanced by their admitting that " our Church does not encourage it" — by their abstaining from in " any way inculcating it"— or even by their thinking " it inexpedient to bring forward ** such a topic in public discussion." Nor do I assent to their opinion, that " our Church «• does not discourage" prayer for the dead ; on the * Tracts for the Times, No. 7), p. 9. t Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, p. I Hfi et seq. M i i HO contrary, if, as they admit, the Church, ]iaviiii>' at rtrsf adopted such prayer, in the general ivords in which it was used in the ancient Liturgies, afterwards *• for the " safety of her children relin(|uished the practice," even in this sober and harmless form, " m consequence " of abuses connected with it in the Romish syst<'ii ' — abuses, of the least of which she says, that tlu^y are " grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather '* repugnant to tlue AV'^ord of (iod ,'' while of others she declares, that they " were blasphemous fables, and " dangerous deceits ;" — I can hardly propose to myself any more decisive mode of discouraging a praciice, which, in itself, could not be condemned us absolutely contrary to God's AVord. I must go further: I must add, and I do so with unfeigned respect for the integrity and sincerity of these writers, as well as for their eminent ability and learning, that I cannot easily reconcile it with Chris- tian discretion, for any mendjer of the Church to speak with so much of favour of a practice which was thus deliberately, and for such grave reasons, rej)udiated by the Church herself. Still less can I understand what justification can be offered for his saying of the Ro- manist, that in '* deciding- that almost all souls under<'() a painful purification after death, by which Infectum " eluitur scelus, aut exuritur igni, he only " follows *' an instinct of human nature" Surely, if this be true, the Romanist is riglit in his decision : for an instinct of our nature could have come only from the Divine Author of that nature — it nuist be indeed " the " voice of God within us." In connexion with this subject, I cannot but deplore the rashness which has prompted them to reconunend to private Christians the dedication of particular days to the Religious Commemoration of decejised men — d i 1 SI and even to furnish a sju'cial Rishop Ken, formed uppartintlj «>fhc(^ in tlir Breviar\ to a Ron be safe for the Church itself— n private individuals — to pronoun the characters of deceased Chris to assume the gift of "disce* what Ui.ist such a practice be ej History of the Church of Rome Fathers of our Reformation, in c have marked their sense of tlu every portion of the Breviary \ I)ractice, even ^vhile they adopte sound and edifying in it. Yet th( to reconunend this very pract rejected by those wise and hoi to say) reconunend it as only ' " Reformers have begun, " as " a " in private, the principle and spi " forms of devotion, which are c " rized Prayer Book."— No. 75, Again, looking to another ] with the doctrines of Rome, I lu] for which they emunerate " the ne in their list of '* those practical " Christians are exposed in the — namely, " because without it ii " of the Holy Communion."* They thus seem studiously to the same list the pretended Si generally (ol' which confession is Penance, as taught by the Chu * No. 71, p. s t 81 to furnisl) a ,s|U'ciiil Servicf in honour ol n, tbrnicd appariintly on t\w model of an I" Breviar to a HonuKh Saint. Would it the ('hnrch itself — and is it beeoniing in lividuali^ — to pronounce thus confidently on ters of deceased ChristiaUvS — in other words, the gift of "disce. . ;; of Spirits/" To such a practice he expected to lead ? The the Church of Rome has told tis ; aud the our Reformation, in com >iling tiie Liturgy, ed their sense of the dang •, by rejecting on of the Breviary which bears on such a ^en nliile they adopted all that was really edifymg in it. Yet these writers scruple not end this very practice, thus deliberately those wise and holy men — and (strange onunend it as only ('ompleting what our •s have begmi, " as " a iiieans of carrying out, !, the principle and spirit of those inestimable devotion, which are contained in our autho- yer Book."— No. 75, pp. 2, 16. looking to another part of their dealing ctrines of Rome, I lament to see the reason ley enumerate " the necessity of Confession," of '* those practical grievances; to which 5 are exposed in the Romish Communion ; ' because without it no one can be partaker »Iy Comnmnion."* IS seem studiously to decline including in ist the pretended Sacrament of Penance of which confession is but a j)art) ; though » taught by the Church of Rome, is the * No. 71, p. 9. G ^* ,.«^a. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1^ 12.8 ,50 "1 = Mi. ^ I.I 1.25 1.4 1^ 1.6 6" P^ ^ <^ .^ % />^ -c^ W Op/ ''F Photpgmphic Corporation « « ^oal purporting to be that of the Committee of Educa- tion. 90 APIMONDIX I. Your Lorclshi]) inquires whether tin* ptuuphlet in question has been transmitted to your Lordship and to your elergy by authority of the Committee of Privy Council appointed to superintend the iqjplication of sums granted by Parliament for Public Education. This question would be more properly addressed to the President of the Council. In his absence I can only say that I believe the Committee gave a general direction for the circu- lation of the i)amphlet, but that I was not aware, till I received your Lordship's letter, that this had been done in the formal and official manner stated by your Lordship. I have, &c. J. RUSSKLL. No. 3. My Lord, Exeter, Oct. 10, 1839. On my return to Exeter, I had the honour of receiving your Lordsliip's letter of the 7th inst., and I thank you for the early answer vvhich you have given to the question I felt it ray duty to propose. I assent to your Lordship's suggestion, that this question would be more properly addressed to the President of the Council. But the notoriety of his absence from England made it necessary that I should address your Lordshij), whose name stands in the list of the Committee on Education next to that of the Lord President. Your Lordship having now informed me, that you believe the Committee gave a general direction for the circulation of the pamphlet, entitled " Recent Measures for the Promotion of Education in England," and the cover of a copy of it, now before me, bearing on its margin a printed notice of its having been sent from the " Committee of Council on Education," as well as being superscribed "■ On Her Majesty's Service," and sealed with the impress of " Privy Council," I cannot but regard the Committee as adopting, and therefore responsible for, the contents of the pamphlet. In consequence, I request your Lordship's attention to a most extraordinary misrepre- { 1 APPKNDIX I. <3l 1 «c.ntation mmle in it, of words spoken by mo in tho House of Lords, on the 5th of July last. Tlie passage to wiiich 1 refer, is in pages 55, ob, and 1 quote it at length, to prevent all misapprehension :— "One principle which has been more fully illustrated ni the debates is especially applierble to these cases, viz.— that while the Government is most anxious that religious nistruction should be united to secular, and will grant all proper lacihties for that purpose, the State is peculiarly charged with the duty of rendering secular instruction accessible to all, and with the improvement of the quality of such secular instruction, by assistance from the public funds, and by constant superintend- ence." In the House of Lords, the Marquis of Lansdowne observed,—" I said, the State should provide for the education, I did not say for the spiritual and religious education, but ibr the secular education of the people." " The Bishop of Exeter was glad the Noble Marquis had given that explanation. He assented to the principle." Presently afterwards it is said, - Upon the principle thus elucidated by the discussions in Parliament, we trust that all parties are now agreed." Now the plain and obvious import of this is, that in the discussion of the question in the House of Lords, I assented to the principle, that the duty of the State, in respect to the education of the People, is limited to " rendering secular in- struction accessible to all," and to " the improvement of the quality of such secular instruction, by assi^stance from the public funds, and by constant superintefidence." But so far is this from being a correct statement, that it is contrary to the whole tenor of the speech delivered by me on that occasion. So manifest, indeed, is the perversion of my very plain meaning, that if it had occurred in an anonymous publication, I must have considered it as wilfully fraudulent. Bearing, however, as it does, the formal and official sanction of the " Committee on Education," I cannot ascribe it to any dishonourable motive, and willingly impute it to some most strange and utterly unaccountable misconception. That this is the gentlest description applicable to it, I proceed to satisfy your Lordship, by citing a passage from the report of my speech, which 1 have the honour of enclosing, and which was corrected by myself immediateiy after it had been delivered. 02 APl'KNDIX I. I ! I I » r.^ r . At pages T), (). 1 was (K-alinrr with a question iiroposod to the Bench of Bishops hy the I.ord Pn'si«h>nt: •• Do (hey think that the Climvh hn» a right to the Kchieation of the people at hirge. iiichuhn*? that ])ortion of the peopU', niiliions in number, who whether because the Petitioners had prayed only for their own relief from the operation of the Bill, without testifying any concern for any general principle, has never been stated. Be this as it may, it is manifest that the alteration, thus introduced, affected the generjil character of the Bill most materially. Hitherto, the ostensible reason for urging its adoption had been the necessity of remedying the great evil which was alleged to exist at present, — " of Causes of Correc- tion of Clerks being tried before a Tribunal without adequate experience, and without an adequate Bar." But this reason cannot any longer be gravely insisted on ; for it is notorious, that in neither of these particulars (nor, so far as I have heard, in a.«y other) does the Court at York excel the Court at Exeter, or at Chester, or at several which might be named. Indeed, by a Return made to the House of Lords, it appears that in the last ten years, while there had been heard, and adjudged, without appeal, four Causes in the Consistorial Court of Chester, not one Cause had been brought by appeal or letters of request to the Court at York from any Diocese in the whole Province ; and only one original Suit had been there instituted ; which solitary Suit had not been heard nor prosecuted : yet, if this Bill had become a Law, the jurisdiction of the Court of Chester, and of every other within the Province, would have been swallowed up by that of York, on the pretence of its being necessary to give to the whole Province the benefit of the superior experience, and superior Bar, of that Court ! In the future discussion of the matter, this pretence must, I apprehend, be abandoned, and some other must be made to take its place. But no other (so far as I recollect) has been ever suggested, except that which dropped from the g, namely. uivi V. isaiU fiiui III luu ueuuic oil luu iiiiru ruuuiiiE, nunii;i = APPENDIX II. 99 L !iy. that, incorrigibly bad as he deemed the Bill to be, "as amended by the Select Committee," yet he should vote for it, because it was necessary that some Bill for the Correction of the Clergy should pass (and he despaired of any other), in order that larger measures of Reform in the Ecclesiastical Courts should not be impeded by the obstacles which are at present placed in their way, by the existence of a Bishop's Court, for the enforcement of discipline over the Clergy. Now, if the Clergy of England deem so highly of the principle of centralization, which is the great favourite with many of the Metropolitan lawgivers of the day, as to be willing to sacrifice to it that episcopal jurisdiction, which (whatever be thought of its sacredness) must be admitted by all to have existed in the Church from the time of the Apostles,— they will not give themselves or the Legislature any further trouble in the matter. But if ihey think, a^ I avow myself to think, that the Constitution of our National Church, as a sound branch of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, is involved in the issue, they will exert all their energies, and adopt every fit and becoming expedient, for the purpose of defeating the Bill of last year, if it be revived in the next Session. In making this appeal to th»i Clergy at large, I frankly avow my wish, that those Bishops who support the Bill would adopt the same course. One of them has done so, and I honour him for doing it. To the arguments which he has adduced, I shall now venture to address a few observations. He says of the Bill, that '' it leaves untouched any per- sonal authority which the Bishop derives from a Divine source, as far as the same can be exercised, or is even possessed, at present: that we can still in y \ ute, and in ♦he spirit of friend- liness, give advice and warning, or administer reproof and re- monstrance : — or, if such advice and reproof be unheeded, we can have recourse to threats of publicity and exposure, and of ulterior measures, of which the rueful consequence may be set plainly and intelligibly before the offending party."* It is added, that " this power is indispensable to, and inseparable from, the Episcopal Office ; and this remains entire." In other words, by the Bill as it stands, a Bishop will not be * Charge to the Clergy of the Diocese of Hereford, in July and August, 1839, p. 16. II 2 I: I ifl w 100 APPENDIX II. deprived of the power of doing any of those thincrs, which every other subject of Her Majesty — certainly every other mem- ber of Christ's Church — may do hkevvise. If there be a sinole particular of those enumerated, (and I cite them as they are enumerated) — if there be, 1 say, any one particular of the power here stated to be " indispensable to, and inseparable from, the Episcopal Office," which the parish-beadle has not a right to perform, as well as the Bishop,— I am at a loss to perceive what that particular is. Biit the respected writer proceeds, he " cannot deem public judicial power essential to his office." On the publicity of the exercise of the power I say notiiing, because it is not the point in discussion ; but on the judicial power itself, that it is *' in- herent in the office of a Bishop," I appeal to an authority, which both ho and every one of the Clergy have repeatedly acknowledged, and will not now deny, to be agreeable to God's Word, the book of consecrating Bishops, and of ordering Priests and Deacons. In examining the Bishop, previous to his consecration, the Archbishop solemnly asks him—" Will you, such as be unquiet, disobedient, and criminous, within your Diocese, correct and punish, according to .such authority as you have by God.s- Word, and as to you shall be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm ?"_Answer : " I will so do by the help of God." Now, whatever may be said of that which is '• committed to us by the Ordinance of this Realm," it will hardly be denied, that the " Authority wiiich we have by God's Word" is " essen- tial to our office," and as little will it be denied, that the authority to " correct and to punish the unquiet, disobedient, and criminous, within our Dioceses," is "judicial:' If it be not, it must be arbitrary : an alternative, which I am sure my Right Rev. Brother will not adopt. He goes further :—« Even assuming," says he, "thojudi- " cial power to be, as claimed, inherent in the I- ^ .scopal "Office, that power may, by consent, be delegated to another," (in this I fully agree with him,) " and therefore, by analogy of " custom, to the Dean of the Arches." Though I do not pretend to understand what is here meant by " analogy of custom," T yet entirely agree with him, that there 'is nothing,'' so far as I know. APPENDIX II. 101 in- in either the person or the office of the " Dean of the Arches/* which makes that very learned person incapable of receiving the delegation of judicial powers from any Bishop who may choose to give it to him. But what is all this to our present question? which is, not whether a Bishop may, "by consent, delegate to ancthe." that "judicial power which is inh rent in the Episcopal Office," but whether an Act of Parliament may, without " his consent," take his inherent power from the Bishop, and give it to whomsoever Queen, Lords, and Com- mons shall think fit. Let us pass to something, which shall better justify our attention. " Wherever the power actually resides, it must he exercised through the forms of an Ecclesiastical Courts I rejoice to read this sentence, and entirely assent to it — I rejoice the more to read it, because it gives me the authority of one of the most firm supporters of the Bill, against the ludicrous absurdity of that clause in it, " as amended by the Select Committee," which professes to be a " saving of the Arch- oishops' and Bishops' powers," by enacting that "nothing therein contained shall be construed to affect any authority over the Clergy, which they may new, according to law, exer- cise, personally, and without Pioccss in Court'' — in other words, they may exercise their inherent judicial powers in any manner, except that, in w'lich only, my Right Reverend Brother truly says, it can be e::ercised. But here, I grieve to say, our accordance is at an end — or rather, I trust, suspended : for I shall be much disappointed, if we do not come together again, before we have done. " Wherever the power actually resides, it must be exer- " cised through the forms of an Ecclesiastical Court, which, " having its origin and authority wholly from the State, can "beat any time suspended or amended by the State."— P. 17. Now, this is coming to the real pith of the question, and I have pleasure in grappling with it. That the " Ecclesiastical Court," in which the judicial power of the Bishop "must be exercised," has "its origin wholly from the State," I most respectfully, but most confi- Pnr if this nnwpr be inherent in the office, and flon+lv rlpnir " J J- the Court is necessary to it, neither the power nor the Court can* 102 APPENDIX II. 1* S I I i i Hi V Jll! have had its origin from the State, unless the office itself has its origin from the same quarter — a position, whicli J am quite sure the writer whose words I am citing would on no account admit. In truth, it is a position, not only at variance with sound theo- logy, but most notoriously contradicted by history. For cen- turies, before the Christian Church was known to the laws of any State, except as a subject of persecution, Bishops held their courts, exercised their inherent judicial power "personally by process in Court." But, henceforth, if this Bill pass into a law. Bishops will be prohibited from doing this in England — a restraint never before imposed in any Christian country acknowledging Episcopacy. So much for the origin of these courts. But is " their au- thority,'" as this writer affirms, "wholly from the State?" I think that, on reconsideration, he will himself be eager to de- clare that it is not. I have already presumed to remind him, that he has himself solenmly engjiged that he will. " by the help of God," exercise the judicial power inherent in his office, " according lo such authority as he has by God's Word;' — and, as he has himself said, that this " must be exercised through the forms of an Ecclesiastical Court," he cannot fail to perceive that this court itself derives part of its authority, (need 1 say the chief, the distinctive, the sacred part ?) not from the State, but from " God's Word." Do I then contend for the independence of the Bishops' Courts ? Is not the Queen in all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil, within these her dominions, supreme ? Most r rtainly. But Her Majesty's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical does not arise from the same source as her supremacy in temporal causes— namely, from the judicial power exercised in them being derived from the Crown ; but from the inherent right >t Sovereignty to govern all persons within the realm, and to see that all perform the duties belonging to them. What ! then, it may be asked ; do these Courts in England derive no part of their authority irom the Crown? Far otherwise ; they derive thence a very important part, but not thf* moat, imrinrfpnl- 1io/hqiio« r./-if that —VJ-U :_ „i i-.i-i V . — J J -^vi-avtijr. iiui liidl tTijii;!! ;a uuM;iutciy essential. The external co-active power of Ecclesiastical r'^*««(*i i^s APPENDIX II. 103 Courts is wholly derived from the State. The power of in- flicting any punishment, immediately affecting the temporal possessions of any members of the Church— and, therefore, of those with whose case we are now concerned, ministers of the Church— we freely, dutifully, and gratefully acknowledge to hold from Her Most Gracious Majesty. The higher power of these Courts— that which reaches to the internal status of those whose causes are decided in them—we derive from a higher source, from " Him by whom kings reign." And here, while we thus dutifully and gratefully acknow- ledge the powers given to us by the State, I must not be afraid of saying, that the State would desert its duty, if it did not give such powers in aid of the due exercise of om Episcopal, and, therein, of our judicial functions, as, on full consideration, it shall deem necessary for that purpose. This follows, as of course, from the State's acknowledging the Church to be a branch of the Holy Apostolic Church. The government by Bishops, and the judicial power of Bishops, as necessary to the high purposes of their institution, are included in that acknow- ledgment. If, therefore, the present powers of Bishops, and the present constitution of the Bishops Courts, be inadequate to the due exercise of spiritual discipline, especially in the correction of criminous Clerks, the legislature has not only the right, but the duty, of reforming those Courts. But it has not the duty, nor the right, nor, with all reverence be it spoken, the power, to transfer the inherent authority of Bishops to other persons, even though this be attempted for the laudable and pious purpose announced in the title of this Bill ; viz. " for the more etlectually enforcing Church discipline." The 26th Article says, that " it appertaineth to the Disci- pline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences, and finally, being . id guihy, bij just judgment he deposed:' By whom is this '' just judgment of deposition from the Ministry'' to be pronounced ? Can it be by any one who is not authorized by the Church, to whose " Discipline it appertaineth ?" Affain ♦>!'» ?i^rfl Artinlp savs. " the Dcrson. which, by hist judgment of the Church, is rightly cut of from the unity of 104 APPENDIX II. the Church, and cvcomm mil c(tted, ought to be taken by the Hi ! i : i Hi m I \\ whole multitude of the fiiithlul as an Heathen ana Publican, until he be openly reconciled by Penance, and received into the Church by a Judge, that halh authority thereunto.'' How can a Layman, receiving his authority merely from the State, be esteemed •' the Church ? " How can he deliver any '\just judgment;' being without jurisdiction delegated to him by the Church ? How can he " a,t off from the unity of the Church ? " How can he thus bind / or, again, how can he ''receive into the Church?'' What '^ authority thereunto hath " he ? How can ho thus /oo\e ? That the person, to whom it is proposed to transfer this au- thority, is one, who already holds a certain spiritual jurisdic- liun by commission from the Archbishop of Canterbury, makes no difference whatever in the question. It would make no dilFerence, even if the jurisdiction, which the Bill professes to confer on the Judge of the Court of Arches, were similar to that which the Ardibishop's Commission has given to him. But the jurisdiction contemplated in the Bill is totally dif- ferent from that which is delegated by the Archbishop— it is a jurisdiction, which the Archbishop could not give— for he has it not himself— he having no original jurisdiction out of his own Diocese. More than this : if given, as the Bill affects to give, it would not merge within it the jurisdiction which he already holds by delegation from the Archbishop— viz. jurisdiction in causes oUippeal; but it would destroy it, for no causes of appeal to the Archbishop would remain— the Archbishop's own juris- diction, both appellate and original, would be extinguished, and the subject delegated to his official would of course alto- gether vanish. In short, the Judge of the Court of Arches would be no longer an official of the Archbishop, though he might be appointed by him. His power and jurisdiction would be derived solely from Parliament, and might be trans- ferred at pleasure by Parliament. If it be given this year to the Judge of the Court of Arches, it may be given next year to the Judge of the Court of Bankrupts, or to Her Majesty's Justices in Quarter Sessions. What is Erastianism, if this is not ? It has been said by very high authonfy, that the exercise of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, in a State which establishes and APPENDIX II. 105 endows the Churcli, must be greatly different from the exer- cise of that jurisdiction, in such a state of things as existed in the Primitive Church. I admit this as an abstract position. But if it be maintained, that the ditTerence in the exercise of that jurisdiction is to be carried so far, as virtually to extin- guish the jurisdiction itself, 1 must withhold all assent to any such doctrine. If the consequence of the Church being eu- dowed by the State, is to rob the Church of its essential powers, what is this, but to realize, in respect to the Church, the fable of antiquity— to famish it to death, by turning what ought to be its support and sustenance into mere gold ? Should matters ever be brought to such a pass in England, I trust the Church would say to the State, not "Thy Gold perish with thee," but "Take back thy Gold, and let me subsist as I may, and discharge my sacred duties without it or thee." Thank God, there is no fear of such an issue— an issue preg- nant with serious evil to the Church, but with incalculably more serious evil to the State. Thank God, I repeat, there is no fear of such an issue. His holy word is reverenced in this land ; and, so long as it is reverenced here, the Church will find, that " Kings shall be her nursing Fathers, and Queens her nursing Mothers." In conclusion, fully admitting the need of some amendment of the Law, as respects the correction of delinquent Clergymen, I venture to lay before the Clergy the Heads of a Bill for that purpose, requesting their judgment and assistance in preparing it 10 be laid before Parliament, early in the next Session. (Copy.) No. 1. Breviatk of a proposed Bill for the more effectually enforcing Church Discipline, in the correction of Clerks. The proposed Bill will have a two-fold object, first, to ren- :.ty is recognised and asserted by 111 the soundest and ablest divines of the Reformed Church of Eng land, who have written on the nature of the visible Church by Bishops Jewell, Bilson, Hall, Bramhall, Stillingfleet' Jeremy faylor, Beveridge, by Hooker, Field, Hammond, and many other luminaries of that age in which theological learn- mg m England was most diligently and most successfully cultivated, not to mention other authorities of the last and the present centuries. 2. Because, to prohibit judicial process, even in the domes- tic forum of the Bishop, and thereby, as was admitted in de- bate, to extinguish all episcopal jurisdiction, on th*. nloa that the Church IS now protected by the State, is to confound things % APPENDIX II. 117 l\ essentially distinct: it is in effect, however laudably intended, to betray the Church, and to mislead the State. On the one hand, it forbids the exercise of the most sacred rights and duties of those to whom they are committed by the word of God, (being thus an act of direct persecution,) and professes to transfer them to another, whom no human law can empower to exercise them in some of the highest particulars enumerated in the Bill. Such are excommunication, deposition, and de- gradation, judgments which cannot be pronounced by any but Those to whom the Divine Head of the Church hath com- mitted the keys of His kingdom, and the power to bind and to loose. On the other hand, while the Bill thus seeks to arm a lay- man, by authority of Parliament, with that spiritual sword which not the highest lay potentate on earth can wield, it hides from the Sovereign, and from the great council of the nation, that solemn duty which " He by whom kings reign, and princes decree justice," hath inseparably annexed to Christian magistracy, the duty of upholding and enforcing the (>ssential disciphne of his Church— a duty, which this State, so long as it acknowledges our own apostolic branch of that Church, can only discharge by sustaining and strengthening, in all •' ings necessary, the government by Bishops,— a duty which the sovereigns of this realm have hitherto religiously observed, and which the Legislature hath repeatedly recog- nized in its most solemn acts, especially in that great statute of 24 Henry VIH. c. 12, which most eloquently, yet most accurately, sets forth the constitution of this imperial realm, •' governed by one supreme head, under whom a body politic, compact of all sorts and degrees of people, divided in terms, and by names of spiritualty and temporalty are bound to bear, next to God, a natural and humble obedience ;" •« that part of the said body politic called the spiritualty, having always been thought, and being also, at this hour, found sufficient and meet of itself, without the intermeddling of any exterior person or persons, to administer all such offices and duties as to their rooms spiritual doth appertain." And ao-ain, in those more modern statutes, which are, as it were, the landmarks of the Constitution, the 1st William and Mary, c 6, passed by Mr. Somers and the other enlightened patriots of that day, and embodying the contract between the 118 APPENDIX II. i sovereign and the people in the coronation oath; ut' which contract the " preserving the rights and privileges o.' the Bishops and Clergy" is a prominent part ; — And the Act of Union with Scotland, reciting and confirming, as a fundamental article of that union, the act for securing the Church of England, in which it is especially provided that every King or Queen, coming to the royal government of the Kingdom of Great Britain, shall take and subscribe an oath that he will maintain, to the utmost of his power, not oidy "the doc- trine and worship," but "the discipline and government of the Church of England." 3. Because the Dean of the Arches, holding only a limited commisj-ion from his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, which commission does noi extend to original jurisdiction in any diocese whatsoever, would not have even the semblance of ecclesiastical authority to exercise the powers proposed to be given to him by this Bill. Neither can this fundamental defect be supplied by any new and enlarged commission from the Archbishop, who hath not himself a right of original juris- diction, (except in case of nullities,) in any other diocese than his own ; such right, being contrary to the laws of the primi- tive Church, always hitherto held sacred — contrary to a canon of the Council of Nice, acknowledged by the laws both of the Church and State of England to be the first (Ecumenical Council — contrary to the canonical law of England, as ex- pounded even by Lynwood the highest authority for inter- preting that law, himself Official Principal of the Archbishop of Canterbury of his day, who expressly says, "the Arch- bishop cannot depute Officials to hear causes in the diocese of any of his suffragans. For, as the Archbishop himself cannot constitute an Official in the Diocese of another Bishop, neither can he there exercise anything which concerns judicial powers." Indeed, the assumption by the Archbishop of Canterbury, or his officers, of original or concurrent juris- diction in another diocese, hath been repeatedly adjudged iu the highest Courts of England to be an usurpation, founded solely on his ancient claim of being Legatus Natus of the Pope. So that the t)owpr which thf! 'orssent Bill either recognises as already existing in the Court of Arches, or affects 10 give to it by its provisions, that Court is not com- petent to exercise, unless the supremacy claimed by the Pope APPENDIX II. 119 of do indeed reside within this Church, in the Archbishop of ^''iraccordance with this language of the laws have been the solemn declarations of our most illustrious princes, claiming indeed, as is their due by the laws of God and man, to be over all persons, and in all causes, both spiritual and temporal, supreme; yet disclaiming all authority of ministering Gods word, of which the power of the keys, and of binding and loosincr is an especial part : in a word, having both the right and the duty to rule all estates and degrees of men committed to their charge by God, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers. . . , , 4 Because, by an unprecedented and unprmcipled assump- tion of power, the Bill professes to subject the Clergy of the province of York, both those of the com-provincial Bishops therein, and even those of the Archbishop and metropolitan himself of that province, lu the jurisdiction of the court of the Archbishop of Canterbury; whereas the province of York, and the jurisdiction of the Archbishop and Bishops thereof, are as wholly independent of the Archbishop of Canterbury as they are of any prelate in the most remote corner of the Chris- tian world. 5. Because the only advocate of the Bill, who discussed its provisions, admitting in several important particulars that great principles were violated by it, rested its justification solely on the practical benefits sought thereby: thus, m con- formity with that fatal policy which has been the bane of our times, proposing to sacrifice, in a matter of this high religious nature, principle to expediency ; although the highest authority in the Church, by just before declaring that the actual result even of the present most defective state of ecclesiastical dis- cipline is such, as admits of little improvement through the operation of law in the general tone of clerical manners, had precluded even the plea of any urgent necessity for making fill* mioniiCG* 6. Because, on the soundest considerations even of expe- diency itself, the provisions of the Bill are open to just ob- jection, inasmuch as they have a direct tendency to^ destroy or most grievously to impair, .the wholcsouie authority of Bishops, by making them, instead of judges, to become merely 120 APPENDIX II. |.;f ]f t f^ I 11 'i ^'' IP ' ■ the prosecutors of thoir Clergy, before a lay tribunal ; or, it may be, to employ them as executioners of the sentences of that tribunal. 7. Because, although it may be true that Kisliops are not likely to be skilled in legal science, they must be. more com- petent, than laymen can be expected to be, to decide those questions of ecclesiastical discipline, which, in the exercise of their spiritual jurisdiction, would most commoidy come before th.-m. As ecclesiastics, they nuist be most competent to decide whether, and in what degree, the ecclesiastical duties of a clergyman have been violated ; more particularly, because many things are criminal in a clergyman, which in a Layman would be merely indecorous, and not always even indecorous ; and many things are punishable by the Canon Law, and the principles of ecclesiastical discipline, to which no principle of temporal law is even applicable. Again, and in a still higher degree, Bishops must be more competent, than lay judges, to decide in cases where the question relates to the soundness of doctrines taught or sanctioned by a clergyman ; especially as the constitution of the Church has provided him with an Ecclesiastical Council to assist him in his decisions ; and, mean- while, he can experience no difficulty in obtaining the best legal advice, enabling him to dispose of questions of law as satisfac- torily as any ordinary Court. Eighthly and lastly. Because, if this Bill shall pass into a law, that most estimable and venerable body of men, the Clergy of England and Wales, will be reduced to a worse condition than any other class of Her Majesty's subjects, being made liable to answer to charges affecting their highest religious and civil rights, their feelings and characters as men, their func- tions as Christian Ministers, before a remote judicature, which, because it is remote, can never inspire confidence, but will be found, in practice, at once to prevent the prosecution of real delinquency, and to rob calumniated nnocence of that best pro- tection, the known characters of the accused and the a,ccusers, as well as of the witnesses by whom the accusation is sustained or repelled. H. Exeter. i > ,1 APPENDIX 11. 121 No. III. Correspondence with the Bishop of London. (Copy.) No. 1. My deak Lord, Modhury, 9th August, 1839. I YESTERDAY stiw in a newspaper that, the Church Disci- pline Bill is to be committed in the House of Commons on Monday night. I need not express to you my astonishment at this, recollecting that, when you prevailed on the scanty rem- nant of an exhausted House (after midnight of the '25th ult., and after long debates on two other important questions) to give to your Bill a third reading, it was stated by you, that you did not think it right that the Bill should pass during the present Session, but that you hoped it would have a third reading in the House of Lords, and that it might then be considered by the Clergy during the recess, and a new Bill, in preparing which you were so good as to say that you hoped for my as- sistance, might be brought into Parliament in the next Session. That you said all this sincerely, I have no doubt ; and that it was only by your saying this that the House was induced to accede to your urgent request, 1 am equally certain. It is. therefore, with unbounded surprise, that I perceive that the Bill is now apparently being carried through the House of Commons by Government. Whether your representation of the ground on which you pressed the third reading in our House can arrest the further progress of the Bill, I know not ; but I venture to assure myself that you have made, or will forthwith make, the attempt. I am on my tour of visitation. A letter addressed to me at the Post-office, Plymouth, will reach me, as I shall be for several days near that place. I write in haste to save the post. I am, my dear Lord, Yours very faithfully. The Lord Bishop of London. H. Exeter. (Copy) No. 2. My dear Lord, London House, Aug. 12, 1830. 1 PROTEST most strongly against the interpretation which you have put upon my speech on the third reading of the t • 122 APPENDIX II. I 1 1; fJ!!l ^r -it ' lii Church Discipline Bill. Most assuredly I did not commit the absurdity of expressing a wish that a Bill which I had done my oest to carry through the House of Lords should not pass the Commons. I did express my belief that, after what the Lord Chancellor had said, the Bill would not in fact pass the House of Commons ; and I said also that there were imper- fections in the Bill, which the delay would give us an oppor- tunity of remedying. But I entirely dissent from your opinion, that what I said in that respect prevailed upon the House of Lords to pass the Bill, or that its supporters had any advan- tage in the thinness of the House. On the contrary, I believe that your minority bore a larger proportion to the majority, than it would have borne in a fuller House ; and that, if we had declared our determination to do all in our power to carry the Bill through the Commons, it would equally have passed, tlie Chancellor being the only person who said that he voted for it, not approving it, but believing that it would not pass the other House. You cannot have forgotten that every other Peer who was present when I spoke, with the exception of the three or four whom you told me you reckoned upon as likely to vote with you, were in favour of the Bill. You certainly were not induced to forego opposition by any understanding that the Bill was to be dropped : for, by going to the vote, you effectually precluded the supposition of any such understand- ing; at least, of any compromise or agreement. The course which you took implied the rejection of any such compromise, had it been proposed, which certainly was not the case. Lord Devon agrees with me in my assertion, that there was no un- derstanding to the effect which you suppose. Lord Shaftes- bury confirms the accuracy of my statement. The Lord Chancellor, upon being asked whether there was any objection to proceeding in the House of Commons, if the Bill should be taken up there, replied " Certainly not." It is so obvious, that I hardly think it necessary to state ic, that my remarks as to the probable fate of the Bill in the Commons referred to its abandonment by the Lord Chancellor, who was the author of the Bill, and not to the objections of its opponents. Far, therefore, from thinking that I should act with the slightest degree of inconsistency in consenting to its being car- '°' the House of Commons with the necessary < rtf^fl fbrniiffVi APPENDIX II. 123 amendments, I am very doubtful whether the withholding of such consent would not justly subject me to that charge. I have however stated to Dr. Lushington, and through him to Lord John Russell, the impression which you state to exist in your mind, and the probability, that the Archbishop and the Bishop of London will be denounced to the Clergy, if the Bill should be pressed, as having sanctioned a departure from a supposed engagement, to which in fact neither of them was in any way a party. What course will be pursued by the Government I cannot say. If the Bill should be dropped, the Archbishop wishes it to be clearly understood that a Bill, which will probably be the same as to its leading provisions, will be brought into the House of Lords on the very first day of the next Session, and pressed on with all practicable speed. Believe me, my dear Lord, Yours faithfully, C. J. London. The Lord Bishop of Exeter. P.S. I wrote this letter yesterday, in London, and unluckily brought it to Fulham in my pocket, and did not discover the mistake till it was too late for the post. . (Copy.) No. 3. My dear Lord, Pentillie Castle, 15th August, 1839. If you really thought that my former letter expressed or implied that there was any " compromise or agreement" be- tween us, to the effect that the Church Disciphne Bill was not to be proceeded with, I venture to assure you, that a re-perusal will convince you that you misinterpreted it; and, therefore, that the question which you proposed to Lords Devon and Shaftesbury was altogether out of place. What I intended to be understood as saying was, that you, having admitted the ex- istence of much imperfection in the Bill, and having assented to the force of several objections (not indeed specified by you) I' ' If ' 124 APPENDIX II. !1 r.Hf I,; III nhich had been urged against it, did yet entreat the House to to it a third readi order that, being printed, it rht give be considered by the Clergy during the recess, and that, alter such consideration, another Bill might be introduced in the next Session better adapted to the exigencies of the case ; in drawing up of which you were so good as to say you hoped for my assistance." My memory is distinct and confident on this main particular ; and I am assured by one who derived his in- formation from the newspapers alone, that such was the im- pression made on his mind by the printed report. Such, therefore, is, 1 conceive, the impression left on the minds of the Clergy in general. In truth, the whole tenor of your speech, when I heard it, seemed to me to show that you not only ditl not expect the Bill to pass the House of Commons, but that you did not wish that it should be even taken up in that House in the very imperfect state in which you admitted it to be; — that you urged the Lords to read it a third time, not with a view of making it a law, but for the purpose which I have already mentioned ; and, as this purpose seemed ma.iifestly not to require a third reading of the Bill, I considered your urging the House to accede to the motion only as another mode of asking, that the feelings of those, who had introduced or sup- ported the Bill might be spared the pain of an adverse vote. Whether, in a full House, the majority would have been for or against the Bill, and in what proportion larger or smaller than the actual division exhibited, are matters of conjecture, on which neither of us, perhaps, ought very confidently to jjro- nounce. I admit, that, when we entered the House on that day, you had strong reason to expect a triumphant issue. The Ministers were understood to have made the support of the Bill a Government question ; and the Duke of Wellington and his friends were understood to be desirous and likely to support it, in deference to the authority of the Archbishop of Canter- bury, and (as had been stated) of all the Bishops who were in London before Easter, when the Bill was drawn. But you will recollect that, after the Lord Chancellor had declared his strong sense of the very objectionable character of the Bill (though he said that he should vote for it, because it was neces- sary to his ulterior views that some Bill should pass, and ho i I APPENDIX II. 125 despaired of any other being carried through in the present Session), the leading Ministers left the House, and were fol- lowed by almost all their usual supporters, manifestly, as it appeared to me, because they would not give their further support to a Bill pronounced to be so very bad by " the Lord Chancellor, who," you say, '• was the author of the Bill," but who never had owned a nearer relation to it than that of adopt- ive father, and who repudiated "ven that connexion with it, in the state in which it was then p^^esented. On the other hand, the Duke of Wellington stated that, after hearing what I had said against the Bill, it was, in his opinion, impossible to come to a vote without an adjournment of the debate ; and, as you insisted on going on, his Grace, with very many of his friends, left the House. I may add, that one of those who voted with you told me, that he so voted, because the Bill was not to pass. Such are the grounds, on which I believe that a vast ma- jority of the Lords who attended on that day were satisfied that the Bill ought not to become a law. Whether, if they had remained, they would nevertheless have voted for it, is a question which I have too much respect for them to moot ; especially, when I consider the very grave nature of the measure itself. After all, can you be surprised at the conclusion to which I arrived, in respect both to their judgment of the Bill, and to yours, when, even now, you write of your " consenting to the Bill's being carried through the House of Commons with the necessary amendments ?'" Can words more plainly imply that the Bill is, in its present state, and was, therefore, when you urged its third reading in the House of Lords, utterly unfit to become the law of the land? — an admission, on your part, which concedes all that I could expect or desire ; and is the more satisfactory, because it has been confessedly extorted by the necessity of the case. I read, with some surprise, that you " have stated to Dr. Lushington, and through him to Lord John Russell," not only " the impression which I state to exist in my mind," but also, and seemingly in consequence of that impression, " the proba- bility that the Archbishop of Canterbury and yourself will be denounced to the Clergy, if the Bill should be pressed, as having sanctioned a departure from a supposed engagement, to which, 126 APPENDIX II. ■ in fact, neither of them was in any way a party." On this you must permit me to say, that, if such an argument shall suffice, or is intended, to stop the further progress of the Bill, I urn not inclined to criticise very rigidly either the accuracy of your statement, or the propriety of the terms in which you express your apprehension of its consequences. I content myself with assuring you, that, if, after your own promise, voluntarily given, for the sake of facilitating the third reading of the Bill— I pro- mise heard by the Archbishop, and heard by him without re- mark— that the Clergy shall have full opportunity to consider the Bill before the next Session— that their judgment shall be allowed its due weight— and that a new Bill shall be prepared by you, inviting the assistance of those most opposed, on prin- ciple, to the present;— if, I say, after all this, the course be uUi- mately pursued, which the concluding sentence of your letter declares, as by authority, to be intended— and be pursued with your concurrence— that is, if " a Bill, the same as the present in all its leading provisions," (whatever be the judgment of the Clergy upon it, whether favourable or adverse,) shall " be brought into the House of Lords on the very first day of the next Session, and pressed on with all practicable speed/'— I should deem it a very superfluous task to do what you have thought yourselfathberty to tell Dr. Lushington and Lord John Russell that it is probable I shall do. In conclusion, and as the only comment I shall make on this most extraordinary announcement, ! mus' seriously ask you Is it possible, that the Clergy at large are not to be deemed worthy of a voice, in a discussion so immediately interesting to them, both on their own account, and on account of the Church ? Can you, or I, or any one else, be blind to the ab- solute certainty, that there must be in that body mai^y, very many, as capable of forming a sound judgment on this subject, as any, or as all, of the Bishops on the Bench ? It is mani- festly a matter which ought to be submitted to the deliberations of the Clergy in Convocation, in which their voice would be as powerful as ours ; and if, for any reasons, good or not good, Convocation is not permitted to sit, it is, in my unalterable judgment, only just, proper, and even decent, that we Bishops should seek to obtain a knowledge of the sentiments of the Clergy on this great question, and should represent those sen- 1 1' ■•3 APPENDIX II. 127 I timents to Parliament witlx all the weight which we can give to them, and to which they are most undeniably entitled. I am, my dear Lord, Very faithfully yours, H. Exeter. The Lord Bishop of London. St. Germans, \7th August. PS. — Since writing the preceding letter, I have had an opportunity of reading a report of what passed in the House of Commons on Wednesday last. By it, I find that the con- tingency has occurred, which your last sentence contemplated ; the Bill has been " dropped," and the Clergy, I conclude, must be prepared to see the course which you have been authorised to annoimce actually pursued. By the same report, 1 find, that the name of Lord John Russell must be added to those of the Lord Chancellor and yourself, as authorhies for the incurable badness of the late Bill. I further find, that, what- ever may be thought by us Bishops, the judgment of the Clergy is regarded by t least one distinguished member of the other house as necessary to the due consideration of a measure so immediately affecting them and the Church. Any letter addressed to me at Exeter will be forwarded to me, though probably it may be rather tardy in reaching me. (Copy.) No. 4. My dear Lord, Londo'a, 16M August, 1839. 1 HAVE just recollected that your remark to me, as to the smallness of the number who would probably divide with you, was made on the occasion of the Ecclesiastical Preferment Sus- pension, not of the Church Discipline Bill. It is quite immaterial to the point which I had in view ; but I think it right to cor- rect the error. Believe me, my dear Lord, Yours faithfully, C. J. London. To the Lord Bishop of Exeter. London : Primed by W. Clowes and Sons, Siuralbid Street. Lately published, 8vo., 2s. *% CHARGE r,;: ^11 DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF EXETER, BY THE RIGHT REV. HENRY, LORD BISHOP OF EXETER, AT HIS TRIENNIAL VISITATION. In the months of August, September, and October, 1836. mf Also, SPEECH OK THE BISHOP OF EXETER ON NATIONAL EDUCATION, IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, July 5, 1839. Published and Sold by Roakk and Varty, 31, Strand. {Price 2(1., or I2s. per hundred, for dittribution.) .^ lA r ^ N, The following Correspondence has taken placm be- tween THE Marquis of Lansdowne and the Bishop of Exeter : — The Marquis of Lansdowne to the Bishop of Exeter. My Lord, London, Nov. 19, 1839. My attention has been called to some passages of a Charge, recently published by your Lordship, as delivered to the clergy of the diocese of Exeter, commenting upon expressions of mine contained in the report of a speech I made in the House of Lords this year, on the subject of public education. Your Lordship has selected for quotation some words con- tained in a paragraph which relates solely to the inspection of schools, the manifest purport of which is, that some provision to secure efficient inspection as to the training of children in liabits of order, cleanliness, discipline, and industry, is of equal importance, or, in other words, no less necessary, than that re- lating to religions instruction (which it was proposed to confide to ecclesiastical authority), as founded on those high truths which it is the duty and the privilege of the church to in- culcate. From the circumstance of your having directed the word " equal" to be printed in itahcs. as well as from a subsequent sentence in your charge, your Lordship appears to have drawn the inference, or intended it should be drawn by others, that I was desirous of impressing upon my hearers that religious in- struction was not an object of paramount importance to every other in general education. I had no such intention, and I deny that inference. Had you done me the honour at the same time to have ad- verted to my having previously stated, in the printed corre- spondence then under discussion, that a system of religious in- struction forms " the most solid foundation" on which public education can be placed, it would have been impossible for your Lordship to have inferred that, in urging the importance of providing by inspection for '' the order, cleanliness, disci- B Mf 11} : J 1 2 TJie Marquis of Lansdowne to the Bishop of Exeter. pHne, and industry of the schools," concurrently with that of religious instruction, confided to the clergy, I could mean to weigh one in the balance as opposed to the other, or to imply more than that all ihese objects are necessary adjuncts, none of \vhich can be excluded in a complete system of education with- out danger to the other. I must also bo permitted to express my regret that your Lordship, having subsequently referred to a statement of mine, that this country, in the scale of secular education, was inferior to the central states of Europe, for the purpose of confrontino- that statement witli the somewhat bold and startling assertion that "on the Continent a principle of economy is the only motive for sobriety," which you quote from the " Appendi:: to Foreign Report, from J. C. Symons, Esq., a gentleman se- lected by the government for this commission on account of his very extensive experience and knowledge of the state of our people," your Lordship has accidentally omitted to state that the language thus quoted is not that of the author of tiie report, but is, on the contrary, in the same document to which it ap- pears that your Lordship's attention has been particularly di- rected, expressly disclaimed by that gentleman, whom your Lordship has justly described as peculiarly entitled to credit, and stated by him to proceed from a person entirely unknown to him. I have not thought it necessary on this occasion to trouble your Lordship with any further remarks than were unavoidably necessary to remove misapprehension where I was myself con- cerned. I have the honour, &c. Lansdownk. The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Exeter. To the Marquis of Lansdowne, K.G., Spc. My Lord, Exeter, Nov. 22. On opening my newspaper I see, with some surprise, that your Lordship has thought fit to publish your letter to me witiiuut wailing for my answer. If you have hereby gained the con- The Bifhop of Exeter to the Marquis of Lamdoume. 3 advantage of preoccupying the public attention two or three days, 1 do not iM>ia. ; ■! i RELIGIOUS WORKS CHRISTIAN SERVICES FOR EVERY DAY IN THE WEEK. By the Rev. PLUMPTON WILSON, LL.B., Rector of Newmarket. Author of " Sermons." 8vo. 6s. 6(1. bound. THE VERACITY OF THE BIBLE. AHOU£D FHOM UMDESIONED COINCIDENCES TO BE VOUND IN IT WHEN COMPARED IN ITS SEVERAL PARTS. By the Rev. J. J. BLUNT. 1.— VERACITY OF THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES. Post 8vo.j 5s. 6d, II.— VERACITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. FROM THE CONCLUSION OF THE PEN lATEUCH TO THE OPENING OF THE PROl'HETS. Post Svo., 6s. Gd. III.— VERACITY OF THE GOSPELS AND ACTS. Post 8vo., 5». Gd. PRINCIPLES FOR THE PROPEIl UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOSAIC WRITINGS STATED AND APPLIED. By the Rev. J. J. BLUNT. Post 8vo.. 6s. Gd. TWELVE SERMONS DELIVERED IN THE NEW TEMPLE OF THE ISRAELITES AT HAMBURG By Dr. GOTTHOLD SALOMON, AND Translated from the German by ANNA MARIA QOLDSMID. 8vo., 7s. Gd. CONSIDERATIONS ON MIRACLES. BY The Rev. CHARLES WEBB LE BAS, M.A. Post 8vo., 6s. SERMONS ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS. By the Rev. CHARLES WEBB LE BAS, M.A., Professor in the East India College, Hertfordshire, and late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Third Edition, 3 vols. 8vo., 10s. Gd, each. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. HE IS. IG. ' AN ARGUMENT 10 PROVE THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIAN REVELATION. By the earl OF ROSSE. 8vo. 10s. 6d. AN ENQUIRY WHETHER The sentence of DEATH pronounced at the FALL of MAN INCLUDED THE WHOLE ANIMAL CREATION, or was h-stricted to the HUMAN RACE. A Sermon preached before the University of Oxford By the Rev. WILLIAM BUCKLAND, D.D,, F.Ll.S. Third Edition. 8vo., l.s. M. DEATH-BED SCENES, AND PASTORAL CONVERSATIONS. Fourth Edition, Printed uniformly with the Family Library. In 3 vols., lis. LANDSCAPE ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE BIBLE, MADE FROM ORIGINAL SKETCHES TAKEN ON THE SPOT. ENGRAVED IN THE BEST STYLE By W. and E. fin DEN. Accompanied by Descriptions, drawn up from Original and other Sources By the Rev. THOMAS HARTWELL HORNE, D.D., Author of " An Introduction to the Study of the Holy Scriptures/' &c. kc. In Twenty-four Parts, price 2s. 6d. each. *,* The peculiar value of Mr. Muruay's "Illustrations of tlio Bible" consists in their boin;,' matter-of-fact views of the jilaces as they now exist, taken on the spot; and nut t'lclitious pictures, made up from prints in books of travels, nor imaginary representations. Persons desirous of biiuliug up these Illustrations in their copies of the Bible may purchase the Ninety-Six Plates, separate from the Text, price 40s. THE SACRED SCRIPTURES ILLUSTRATED FROJI THE CUSTOMS, MANNERS, RITES, SUPERSTITIONS, FORMS OF SPEECH, CLIMATE, WORKS OF ART, AND LITERATURE OF THE HINDOOS. By Observations made during a Residence in the East of nearly Fourteen Years. By the Rev. JOSEPH ROBERTS, Jun. 8vo., 18s. THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE MORAL FEELINGS BY JOHN ABERCROMBIE, M.D., F.R.S.E., &c., First Physician to Her Majesty in Scotland. Fifth Edition. Fcap. 8vo., 5s. 1 i1 !].> i !• I^Hl i RELIGIOUS WORKS PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. AN EXPLANATION OF THE TWO SACRAMENTS, ANU OP THE OCCASIONAL RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. In a Series of Dialogues between a Mother and her Daughters , INTENDED FOR THE USE OF YOUNQ PERSONS. By a lady. Small 8vo., 5s. Od. PRACTICAL LECTURES ON THE HISTORICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. By the Rev. H. LINDSAY, M.A., Rector of Croydon. 2 vols. fcap. 8vo., 1 Os. THE COMFORTS OF OLD AGE. WITH BIOGRAPHICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. By sir THOMAS BERNARD, Bart. Sixth Edition. Fcap. 8vo., 7s. SERMONS, DOCTRINAL AND PRACTICAL, FOR PLAIN PEOPLE. By the Rev. G. R. GLEIG, M.A., M.R.S.L., &c. Second Edition. 12mo., 4«. 6d. SACRED MEDITATIONS AND DEVOTIONAL POEMS; WITH ESSAYS IN PROSE. Composed on various Occasions of Life, aud published for the Use of the Intelligent Mind in its Serious Moments. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo., 7s. 6d. A LETTER TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR, ON THE CLAIMS OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, IN REGARD TO ITS JURISDICTION, AND ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN ITS POLITY. By JOHN HOPE, Esq., Dean of Faculty. 8vo., 2s, 6rf. A JOURNEY THROUGH ARABIA PETR/EA TO MOUNT SINAI AND THE EXCAVATED CITY OF PETRA. The Edou of the Prophecies. By M. LEON DE LABORDE With Sixty-four Platess Wood-cuts, and Mari«: New Edition, 8vo., 18s. Albemarle Street, Decemher, 1S39. S, Mil. MURRAY'S LIST OK ma MOST RECENT PUBLICATIONS. D 1. THE QUARTERLY REVIEW, No. CXXVIII., SKCOND EDITION. tONTBNTS : I. ON LIFE ASSURANCK. II. TRAVKLS in NORTH a:\IKRICA. M.viiiiYAT and Mun RAY. III. LIKK olHISHOP 15UTLKR. IV. ON' MKNDICny. V. LIFK nnd CHARACTER of .ESCHYI.US. VI. PETRARCH, BOCCACCIO, and DANTE. VII. FRENCH ORATORS ami ORATORY. VIII. POST OKFICR REFORM. IX. BRITISH POLICY. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERARY HISTORY OF The 15ih, IGth, and 17th CENTURIES. By HENRY IIALLAM, Esq. Now completed in Four Volumes 8v'0. l')*. each. 3, DISPATCHES and CORRESPONDENCE of his GRACE the DUKE of WELLINGTON. Edited by LIEUT.-COLONEL GURWOOD. Complete in Twelve V'olumcs, 8vo. 2Ui. oach^ and Inde.x, Ifls. 4. A LIBRARY EDITION ov LORD BYRON'S WORKS. Beautifully Printed, with a new and copious Index and a Portrait. 8 vols. 8vo., £4. 4s. Foil Ii.MJSTUATOiis OK THR WoRKs OF LoRD BYiioNja vcrj' limited number of Copies of thi.? New Edition in S vols., 8vo., have been printed in QUARTO. ;-i; Mu. MURRAY'S LIST OF HIS GlBliON'S HISTORY OF THK IIOMAN EMPIRE. All entirely New Edition, EdiUd, wiih Niites, By theRKV. II. II. MH^MAN. In Twelve Vcaumes, illustiiited with original Historical Maps. 8vo. !^v. eacli. .. There cu« b. no <,n.-sUon that this ..iiuou of Gil>bou U th- only one extent to wl'ioh I'a.enU '"^:^{Z:nlniiZ;, e.,,.-ch.Uy as oaU.-d by Mv. Mlln.an. is a w„.,< .;. .11 .i-m- ...d Un all class... It ..Sev Wl^-e .„; a ^o.U uhi.h ..„uld be sa.Vly yn. into the hacds^o ^;; y--^^- ;; -; whose o,.port..u>iti.'s ard „uv.»s for d.-tectiu« its i^TViTsions were few. ^o«, ho« e.. tU,. urors i:nu:,;iLs ,.„d in,,..^., ln~.o, . hav. m...,, .Uimmy =^d .o..,nciu^ly noted. I he pouun, .. not extracted, has been rrnde i,aii>ablu."-.1/o«,'/,/.7 Ilcvkw, May, 18JJ, m i Pi"- THE LIFE OF EDWARD GH3B0X, WITH SELECTIONS FROM HIS COURESHOiNDENCE, &c.; And Notks by thk Rev. II. II. MILMAN. Uniform with Mii.man's CmnoN. One Volume, Svo. 9*. .. The m-.sent volume is a valuable a,.d necessary coni,.anion to the Decline a„ I F.M. The rna- ,„,itv f eaders n,av be excu ed thou,:h th.-y do not n.aUe themselves fa,,„l:a.- «,n, ., do . ;^:i;;;::;;::hi::E'>n::::M.a^^:--- ils vevv renK>vUal)le avilh.or."— jVm,fA//y Rent'"-. 7. AN EXCURSION IN ASIA MINOR, in 183S. INCl.UniNCi -V Vl.^iT TO SEVERAL UNKNOWxX AND UNHKSCRIliED CITIES OF ANCIENT LYCIA AND PAAIPliYLIA. I3y CHAR L E S F 1^ L 1- O W R. With '2-2 Plates and 00 Wood-cuts from tlie Author's Sketches. Imperial 8vo.. 28s. THE ART OF DEER-STALKING: ILLUSTRATED BY A NARRATIVE OF A FEW DAYS' SPORT IN THE FOREST OF ATIIOLL. By WILLIAM SCROPE, E.sq., F.L.S. With 12 l-eatitifnl Illustrations, hy EinviN and Ciiahlks Lanuski.h, R.A. J New Edition, lieviml. Royal 8vo„ 21. 2s. T I I m MOST RECENT PUliLICATIONS. R.A. 4 9. iMAXIMS AND HINTS FOR AN ANGLKR, AND TIIK MISEllIKS OF !■ I SUING: WITH MAXIMS AND HINTS FOR A CI1I<:SS-PLAVER. By RICHARD PENN, Esq. Second Edition, t-nlari^ed. Illustrated with Woodcuts fiom di-iiwiiig.-i by -ir iMam-is Chantrey, R.A., G. Jones, R.A , F. H. Lee, R.A.. and others, lu-ap. 8vo. 7x. Gd. " We wer« Riciitly deliulitcil with tlio ' Mi»ork's of iMsliii:;,'.' » * » " Mr. I'eiiu is an aidi'iit followi'i- of iIk' sport, which lii! .yops far to jnslify, if anj'lliiiii,' c:iti, hy liia rational, nl0^l witly, and a;;ri,'iable little liuok. Tlie latter will liod a coruir in the iioikct of every sensible lishorman. In tin; Maxims iindlliiits lor Oliess-playiui,' the tame good iVelinj,', sound ilifuiraution, iind most fell; ilous liiimuur are employed." — E.iamiucr. 10. A GLOSSARY OF TROVINCIAL WORDS USED IN HEREFORDSHIRE AND SOME OF THE ADJOINING COUNTIES. 12mo. 3s. Cid. 11. A SUMMERS DAY AT HAMPTON COURT: DKING A GUIDE TO THE PALACE AND GARDENS ; wnu An Historical and Illustrative CaU>lo^>,uc of tlie Pictures uccordinu,- ' 7^;- ,/;:,; ,„''a,.ovi,ti..n, un.I ot" ,he sn-atcst rarity, nn.l Ihe sporlsm;... will rca,! "ff^'"'" ';''"' .n.Uunpow.l.-r; '-C'««r'o/y .hots ^^lnch U-avo nolLing more to be wisl.oa from eye, Iku.cI. le.ul, m.l gunp<.«.l i. jeemeii', No, CXWIl. U. ON THE IMIKSKXT UNSETTLED CONDITION QV THE LAW AND ITS ADMINISTRATION, By JOHN MILLER, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn. 8vo. 4j'. Or/. 1.1. DKnicATRD TO TiiK Univi'-usity OK OxvoRf;. THE STATE IN ITS RELATIONS WITH THE CHUllCH. By W. E. GLADSTONE, Esq., Student of Christ Church, and M.P. for Newark. Third Eilition, 8vo., 9s. Gd. ]f>. BUENOS AYRES, AND THE PROVINCES OF LA PLATA. By SIR WOODBINE PARISH, K.C.H., M.NV VKAUS n. M. CUAHOK' i^'AVKAUlKS IN THAT U.PUULIC. With an entirely new Map of South America by John Arrowsmith, and Plates. 8vo. 18s. I •oplc of with a (f inlonso si an well iiiniiiU of 111, and of Quartr.rli/ ICII. MOST BECKNT PUBLICATIONS. 17. TWELVE SERMONS. Delivcved in the NEW TEMPLE OF THE ISRAELITES AT HAMBURG, By Dr. GOTTIIOLD SALOMON ; And Translated from the Gi-rmau by ANNA MAKIA GOLDSMID. 8vo., 7s. (irf. " Among llio molivos wlilcli liavo lod to tho publication of these. Sermons, Is lli« liope that from their i)fius:i\ inniiy of n-.y Cliristinii comitiynieii n'ly dciivf ii belter lui(.«le(lj;e of tlie nclualin^ lailboflbo Juws Toll.esf Soinions I conli.k'nlly aslv tlie attention of the ki.iaiy and on- sci.Mitious Cliriatian. I mav add, tliat many of tliem may lie found availablo for persons of every ri'li«ioi.s denomination and sect. If. in religions di-cnssion, men of all oroeds «ould seek, not points of diirerenoe, bnt points of a','reement, liow much of lliu stiife and bitterness tlmt deform Uod's eiuth would disappear \"—Ti-itnsl'i!ors I'irfacv. Dr Mi- Mr Sir Dr I.i( Sir 11 A I'ro Mr. AN Mr 18. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY Part in., Vol. IX. 8vo. 5*. CONTENTS : RIClIATinSON on the TF.MPF.RATURK ofllic AUCTIC RlUil , I'UKNCII on LA KIOJA in SOl'TII AMKRICA. . l-oniil' S-S VISIT to the SINJAll IIILI.S in MKSOl'OTAMIA. .1. fJAUDNKR WILKINSON on the NILK and tlie I.KVKI.S of KGYl'T ROSS'S JOUKNKY to the RTINS of ALHADIIR in MKSOI'OTAMIA. ut. I,VN(,'II, I.N. on tl SURVEY of ibo I'UiRIS, between HAGIIDAl) and MOSUL. fJORHON liRi:Mi;i! onl'ORT ICSSINUroN, AUSTRALIA. RON IlUMltOLDTon llu- LONGlTUDK of VALl',*. RAISO and CALLAO. fes'.or VDOLl'II KKMAN on a NKW MAI' of KAMCHATKA. G. T. VIGNirs UOUTK TO KAliUL, KASHMIR, and LITTLE TIBET, in 1834—38. TARC'ITC DISUOViaiYin 1^;50. . DA RWIN cm a ROCK seen on an ICERKRG, in OL" South Latitude. 19. THE AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE. Rv TIIOS. FOWELL BUXTON, Esq. Second Edition. Svo. Js., or, with AuitowsMrnfs Utrge Map of Africa, I L, id Plates. 20. CONSIDERATIONS ON NATIONAL EDUCATION. Bv SARAH AUSTIN. Fcup. Svo. 3j. 6rf. E lift; 21. LETTKKS ON PARAGUAY COMPUISINU An Account of a Four YeniV lUs-uknce iu that Rein.bUc, u.uU-r the Q.v.t«m«ut ol' the Dictutor l-'ram-iiv. By J r. Hii.l W. 1'. ROBERTSON ^ iNVw AWi'/ioH, 2 vola. Post 8vo. 'lis. 22, FRANCIA'S REIGN OF TERROR; Hein^' the Continuation of Lctteis on I'-ira-iuiy. By J. P. and W. P. ROBERTSON. Post 8vo., 10s. (W/. 23. THE PARLIAMENTS AND COUNCILS OF ENGLAND. Chronolo -icully arranged fro.n the Reiga of William I. to the Revolution in 16S8. By CHARLES HENRY l^VRRY, Esq., M.D., F.R-S. Svo. ;!u.s. !fs'''l 14' • III DOMESTIC MANNERS 'of THE PvUSSIANS. In a Series or i.ct.ors describing a Year's Residence in that Conntry chieily in the lulerior. By the llKV. R. LISTITI VENABLES, M.A. Post 8vo., 'Js. G(i' 25. THE NORMANS IN SICILY. Bv HENRY (tALLY KNIGHT, Esci., M.P. rost bvo , Ss. Cut. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE ABOVE WORK, buing a Se.ic., now .omplete, of Thi. ty Drawings of TliK SARACENIC AIsi) IsORMAN REMAINS OF SICILY. Folio. MOST KKCENT PUBLICATIUNS. luntnit 26. JOURNAL OF TIIK ACiiucui/ruHAL sociiyrv ok England. No. II. CONTIJNTS; COLONKI, I,K COUTKITR'S PHl/K KSSAY on 1M:RK iiml IMl'ROVKO \ AUIKTIHS of ■NVIIKAT liilclv iiili(i.lu(v.l iiilo r.NUI/.i; l.SSAV on RtUlAr, KCONOMV AlUUhVl). Mr. DIXON'S IMU/K l-SSAY on MAKINIJ (JOMl'D.^T IIKAl'S. Mr. IIAMM.KY'.S I'RIZK KSSAY on WIIKIU, luid S\VlN(i I'l.OUdlS. Mr. CUrilUKRT .lOUNSDN S l'Ul/1'. KSS.VY on I,lgl'll) MANURi:. Mr. riOlTKR'S I'Rl/K KSSAY on DR.VWINli TURMl'S. LARF, Sl'ENCHR on the (JKSTATION ol' COWS. Mr. WAI.HANKi; CllILDKRS un SIIKD-KKKDINO. Mr. VOUATT on the PKTl'.CTION of l'RK(}NAN(!Y in thu MARK unci llu- <"()NV. Mr, MAIN on I'KANl'S IN.IURIOUS to CKOVKR. I'ROl'-KS.SOR SCIUJIILKR on tlu^ I'UYSICAL I'ROI'KRTIKS 01-" SOILS. Roiiort of the London Annual Mirtin« in Mu> , iinil of llic 0.\fonl Mcflin;; (with iiwurds of I'lo- minms.l in July.-1'vi/.o Kssiiys ami I'n-niimns lor Stock in 1^40 anil 1841.— Rules and RogulaUon* — Uoniilions to the Library— LUt of (jovernors and Meniliers to Seiit. 4lli With litho"iapliic Plate aiiil Woodcuts. &vo., jivico 2k. (hi ILS i II A N N I B A L T N n I T II Y N I A: A ))R.\MATIC POEM. nv HENRY GALLY KNlCiliT, Esq., M.P. /hird Edition. I'ciip. 8vo. 'is. ^ul. NS. ountry "28. ELEMENTS OF THE PAIHOLOGY OF THE HUMxVN MIND. By THOMAS }.IAYO, M.U., F.R.S., FcUow olthe Culli-ge of Physicians; aail late Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Fcap. 8vo,, 5s. 6«/. ,Y. 2'J. THE LIFE OF LORD ANSON, The Circumuuvigator ol' the Globe. By Sir JOHN BARROW, Bakt., F.R.S. Printed uniformly vith •' Barrow's Life of Howe." Poitrftit. 8vo.; 14». I Mil. MURRAY'S LIST OF HIS : i! I 'hi TRAVELS IN THE RUSSIAN DOMINIONS BEYOND THE CAUCASUS, AND ALONG TIIK SOUTHERN SHORES OF LAKES VAN AND URUMIAH With a Visit to the Souibern Coast of the Caspian Sea. By Captain RICHAUD WILBRAIIAM. Wirii Map ai*u Vibw» vhov tub Autuou'i Skbtcmh. 8to., 18<. 31. CORRESPONDENCE OF WILLIAM PITT, FIRST EARL OF CHATHAM. E.litcd by Wm. Stamiopk Tavioh, Esq., and Captain John Hknry PiuNGLE, the Executors of his Son, John, Earl ok Chatham. Vols. I. and II. 8vo., 18«. cnch. To be comi)lete(l in Four Volumes, 32. AN INDEX TO THE QUAITERLY REVHiW. Vols. 41 to 59, inclusive. Bting Nos. CXIX. and CXX , «lnch form Vol.OO of the Qua,;. rV', .nd are nece.. sary to complete sets of the work. 8vo. l-2.t. 33. THE JOTTING BOOK: A POLITICAL AND LITERARY EXPERIMENT. I„iennsT in whatever regards the Constitution of England. By AN AMATEUR. Pout 8vo.| 5i. i' MOST UKCKNT PUBLICATIONS. 34. A NMIRATIVE. By Sir FRANCIS HEAD, Bart. 7'/ii>v/ Edition, With a Sun-kmental Chapter, on the PIIOPOSKD UNION of the CANADAS the CLERGY RESEHVE QUESTION, &c. 8vo., 12j. buiind. Th« SuriiUmuntal Chapter is sold separately. 8vo., 2i. 6t/. 35. ANEW GREEK GRAMMAR, FOR THE USE OF SCHOOLS. By tmk Rkv. CIIAHLKS WOHDSWOUTII. M.A., Late Student of Christ Church, and Second Master of Winchester College. 12mo.,3j. fi(/. bound. 36. THE PILGRIM'S PROGRESS, WITH A LIFE OF JOHN BUNYAN. By ROBERT SOUTHEY, LLU., Poet Laureate, &c. &c. &c. New Edition, illustrated with Portrait and Engravings, post 8vo., 10s. Grf. 37. IIISTOUICAL ELOGE OF JAMES WATT. By M. ARAGO, Perpetual Secretary to the Academy of Sciences. Translated from the French, with Additional Notes, by JAMES PATRICK MUIRHEAD, Esq., MA., Of Balliol College, Oxford ; Advocate. Svo. H,9. Qd. 38 CHRISTIAN SERVICES* FOR EVERY DAY IN THE WEEK. By thk Rf.v. PLUMPTON WILSON, L.L.B., Kedor of Newmarket. Author of " Sermons. ' Svo. 6j. Gf?. bound, l!FS 39. ESSAYS ON THE MOST IMPORTANT DlSi:ASES OF WOMEN. Bv ROBERT FERGUSON, M.D. Post 8vo., y.v. C,(/. 40 THE AG.vMEMNON OF .LSCUYLUS. A new K.Utiun of the Tc:vt, vith Critical, Kxplaniitmy. and Philological Notes, designed for the use of Students in the Universities. liY THE Riiv. THOMAS WILLIAMSON PKILK, M.A., Senior Fellow ami Tutor in the University of Durham, aau formerly Fellow of T;iiiity College, Cambridge. Svo. 12s. • The cditiun of Ihe A{;;uucnnu,u yUvM lii>l ou llie list is by Mr. I'oilo, one of tlio tutors of the University of l)iuli:im, ii schol.u- of liij,'li ilistiuclioi. at Caml.ii.\«c, «l.orc! lie was a f.-lloa of Trimly Colle-e- we need not sav more. He tal^es l,is stand very decidedly on tlie old eiitu.vil. i.lolol<,«.cal, and .'vuiumaticiil ground; and his work contains a mass of very valnalde matter lu these depart- menu- and lie lias had the advantage of llie MSS. of llio learned ilishop of Lichfu'ld. who, we con- clnde.i.as ahandoMed his cherished design of re-oditiu« Aeschylus. In most pa-es the mdials " S.L.' occupy a place honourable alike to the master and his yninV— Quarterly Review. 41. A LETTKR TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR, On thk CLAIMS of i.n: CHURCH ok SCOTLAND, IN REGARD TO ITS JURISDICTION, AND ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN ITS POLITY. By JOHN HOPE, Esq., Dean of FAcui/rY. 8vo., 2s. Cil. 42. AN ENQUIRY wmniiEii Tui: SENTENCE of DEATH Pronounceu at the Fall of Man Included tlie whole Animal Creaiion, or was llcsUictcd to the Human Race. ^ Sennun preached before the University of Oaford. By the Rev. VVm. RLCKLAND, D.D., F.RS. Thiuo KumoN. 8vo., 1». Gd> Mr. iViaURAY'S LIST OF NEW WORKS IN THE PRESS. SIR SAMUETs ROMILLY, MEMOIRS and LETTERS of SIR SAMUEL ROMILLY; With bis POLITICAL DIARY. Edited by his SONS. .1 Vuls. 8vo. HUNGARY AND TRANSYLVANIA. WITH IIKMAIIKS Ox\ TIIlilR CONDITION, SOCT \L, POLITICAL, AND ECONOMICAL. BY JOHN PAGET, ESQ. With 88 Illustrations, Engravings, Woodcut, and Map. 2 vols. 8vo. Ready. SPAIN UNDER CHARLES THE SECOND. Extracts fro-n the Corr.sroudeuce of the Ho... ALEXAxXDER STANHOPE, British Minister at Madrid from IG'JO to 1700. Sulectid frc\n the Originals at Chcveuing. By LORD MA HON. Svo. ^^- I I 1, ■ *' ■ 'if I F! !' i; 1 ii M«. MURRAY'S LIST OF THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIAISITY, FROM THE BIRTH OF CHRIST TO THE EXTINXTION OF PAGANISM IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. By the Rev. H. H. MILMAN, Prebendary of Westminster, and Minister of St. Margaret, 3 vols. 8vo. HISTORY OF THE POPES OF ROME, THEIR CHURCH AND STATE, DURING THE XVIni AND XVIItu CENTURIES. Translated from the German of LEOPOLD RANKE. BY SARAH AUSTIN. 3 vols. 8vo. HISTORY OF GERMANY AT THE PEIUOD OF THE REFORMATION. Dy LEOPOLD RANKE. 2 vols. 8 vo, HISTORY' OF ENGLAND. FROM THE DEATH OF QUEEN ANNE to the RElCiN OF GEORGE II. By lord MAllON. J New Edition. 3 vols. Bvo. ANCIENT SPANISH BALLADS. TuANhl.ATKI), Wnil NoTHS, By J. G. LOCKHART, Esq. A New Edition, with original and splendid IlUistrL tiuns. 4to. i NEW WORKS IN THE PRESS. 13 THE RELIGION, AGRICULTURE, &c., OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS. By sir J. GARDINER WILKINSON. FormiiK' the Fourth and concluding Vvlumc of the "Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians."' With very numerous lUustraiious, &c. 8vo. A NEW ENGLISH DICTIONARY OF UNIVERSAL BIOGRAPHY. Constructed on an improved a.iJ entirely orij^inal Plan, and conducted by some of the most distinguished Literary I\Ien of Great Britain and the Continent. TO BR PUBLISIIKD By Messrs. LONGMAN and Co., and Mr. MURRAY, in conjunction. In active Preparation, THE GAZETTEER OF LONDON, Past and Prescnl : A HAND-BOOK for the L0CALITIT<1S and ANTIQUITIES of the BRITISH METROPOLIS. Intended as a Complete Guide to Strangers, and a Book of agreeable reference for Inhabitants. By T. CROFTON CROKER, Esq. 1 vol. post 8vo. SCENES OF DOMESTIC LIFE AMONG THE ROMANS. Translated viiom tjif. Gehman oi' PROFESSOR BECKER, of Leipsig. With Illustrations. 2 vols. Post 8vo. 14 M«. MURRAY'S LIST OF THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE LATE WILLIAM WILBEKFORCE. Edited by iii!, SONS. 2 vols. Post 8vo. Printed uniformly with The Lifk, to which they may be considered as Sui)plomentary. • • Owintrlotlie .•xt.-nt of tl.o Coiresi.mulcuce ..r Mr. Wilbcvfo.ce, it was fonudimiiossible 1o include mor.. th.n a very small v^rt of it in tl.- Life ; n s.lor.lion. tl.oreforo, ..f ll.e nu.sl valuable anTimi.o.tant Letters, ^c, never before priute.!, are l.ere Bive,, to eomplot. ll>e i-.tture of Mr. Wilberforee's Life and Cliaracter. THE CORRESPONDENCE OF WILLIAM PITT, FIRST EARL OF CHATHAM. Edited by WM. STANHOPE TAYLOR, Esq., AND Captain JOHN HENRY PRINGLE, The Executors of his Son, JOHN, KARL OF CHATHAM. The Third anu Fouuth Voluuics, coMi'i.uriNCi tuk Wouk. 8vo, AUSTRIA. Bv PETER EVAN TURNRULL, ESQ., F.R S., F.S.A. 2 vols. 8vo. " The FmsT Volume ccntnins the ' iVarn.tivc of Travels- ,' bciii}; remarks and reHections made in the course of our journey tlirouf;li tlie most interesting parts of Holicmia. tl.e states of Austria an.l Stvria, the Illyriaa Provinces, and the I'eniusula of Istvia ;— including, besides the more vroniinent objects of general interest, notices of the antiquities and ),resent condition of Pola ; of the com- mercial ports of Kiume and Trieste; of the monastic establishments of Admont.Mrdk and .M;iri»/.ell; of the mines of Idri:> ; and of Carlsbad, Gastein, and other principal lialhs; together with some account of tlie exik-d royal fimily .f France, who w.-ve then rcsidin;,' in the vicinity of l•^a^ue. " The Second Volume comiuises tlie notices on tlie social and jiolitical condition of the empire, arran"ed with referen(;e to its various most impovlaut elements,— religion, education, morality, jurisp"ruder,ce. feudal and municipal institutions, ci^il and military administrations, uud domestic and foreign jfioMcy."— Preface. POETICAL WORKS of tiik UK\. H. H. MILMAN ; INCLVDINC* THE FALL OF JERUSALEM-BKLSHAZZAR-THK MARTYR OF ANTIOCH— ANN BOLb:YN— SAMOR, &c. &e. With Preface and Notes by the Author, a Portrait, and other Illustrations. 3 vols. Fcap. Svo. Unh'owm with the Woiiics OF Scott, Ckabbe, Soutuey, &c. A HAND-BOOK FOR TRAVELLERS IN GREAT BRITAIN. Post Svo. In Preparation. NKW WORKS IN TIlK PRESS. 15 HAND-BOOK FOR TllAVli'LLEliS IX THE EAST, INCI.IDINO CJrcecc, Conslanliiiople, Asia Minor, Turkey in Europe, Egypt, the Holy Laud, and Syiiii. Post Svo. BUTTMAN'S LEXILOGUS; Or, a Ciitical Kxiuuinatiou (if tlie Mcauiiiji; and Etyunrloiry of vaiious Gieek Words and Pass.igos in IIomiT, Ilesiod. iuid other Grnek Writers. Translated from the German of the late Piiu.ip Buttman ; and tditid, with Notes and copious Indices, By tuk Rev. J. R. FISHLAKE, \ M., Lute Fellow of Wadham (-ol lege, Oxford. A New EdiHoi. Svo. AN ACCOUNT OF THE BRITISH SETTLEMENTS IN 1 HI*] STRAITS OF .MALACCA, INCI.L'UING PENANG, MALACCA, and SINGAPORE, With ii History of the Maloyiin Sttites on the Pcniusula of Malacca: Comprising their (j'oveuinient, Relii;i(ii, Trad", Pditical and Commercial Relations, Laws. Lan;^i;agi', Population, Revenne, Natural Products, Physical Aspect, Geology, Wild Tribes, &c. By LIEUT. NEWBOLU, 3:d Ueg. Madras Light Infantry, AUle-de-Camp to Brigadier-Cxeneral Wilson, C.B. 2 vols. Svo. A NEW CLASSICAL DICTIONARYj Foil TUK Usi: QV CuI.I.UOKS AND SciIOOI.S. One closely-printed volume, Svo. In active Preparatijii, THE BRITISH EMPIRE IN INDIA. By M. BJORNSTJEIINA, Member ol' the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and of the Academy of 3Ii!itary Science. Translated from the German. Post Svo. I!.' ir> M «. MURRAY'S LIST OF NEW VVORKSJNJTIIEPRESS^ ESSAY ON ARCHITECTURE. By THOMAS HOPE, Esq. Third Edition, carefully revised, .ith a copious I.ulex, an.l nearly 100 Plates. Koyal 8vo. Searhj readi/. Ir: ' )' Li It,: 8 Sowing INSTRUCTIONS IN GARDENING, FOR LADIES. By MRS. 3.0UD0N, \Yith lllustvalivc Wood-cuts. Fcap. 8vo. CONTENTS : ClIAl'. I. Stirring the Soil ; including Digging, Forking, Hoeing, and Raking. CHAV. II. Manuring the Soil, and making Hotbeds. ClIAl'. III. Seeds, Planting Bulbs and Tubers, Tninsplanling, and Watering. ChxP. IV. Grafting, Budding, Inarching, and making Cuttings. ClIM'. V. Training, Pruning, and Destroying Insects. The Kitchen Garden, and the Management of Culinary Vegetables. Cii.vi'. VII. The Kitchen Garden continued : Management of Fruit-trees. Chap. VIII. Flower Garden, and Management of Flowers Chap. IX. The Management of the Lawn, Shrubbery, and Plcasuregronnd. Ciur. X. Rock-work, Moss-houses, and Fountains. Window Gardening and the Managem'I'^mants in Pots in a small Greenhouse. ClIAl>. XII. Calendar of Operations for every Month in the Year. London VMrniMbTvm^M <-«.oWFs and SONS, SUralord "^Lwl. ates. (iiccnlio'.ise.