SITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 1 THE GIFT OF MAY TREAT MORRISON IN MEMORY OF ALEXANDER F MORRISON 4^' ESSAYS AND PAPEES OF EICHARD COPLEY CHRISTIE uru)cie ,/;/ l/ie aae v^ ^3. SELECTED ESSAYS AND PAPERS OF RICHARD COPLEY CHRISTIE M.A.(OxoxN.) Hon. LL.D. (Vict.) EX-CHANCELLOE OF THE DIOCESE OF MANCHESTER AUTHOE OF ' ETIENNE 0OLET, THE MARTYR OF THE RENAISSANCE ' ETC. . , , , , EDITED WITH A MEMOIR BY WILLIAM A. SHAW, Litt.D t J i 3 3 3 3 '^3 '3' • ' '»• •■ ' LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO. 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 1902 All rifjhts reserved * « • > • ^» ^ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . « • • » • > « • » • • • • > * • • • • _».* • ^ • * * " CO tr. PEE FACE The following pages have been given to the world by the widow of Mr. B. C. Christie, as a memorial to his scholar- ship. For the selection of the essays and papers the editor is mainly responsible, in view of the fact that Mr. Christie himself left no specific directions on the point beyond expressing a wish to have his Quarterly articles reprinted. A full list of all his books, essays, papers, and notes is, how- ever, appended to the Memoir, with an indication of the sources where they can be found if reference to them is desired. The reasons for the inclusion of the two final papers, that on the Eelations of the Church to the State and the 1889 Charge as Chancellor will be found set out in the '"^^ Memoir. ^ Appended to the Memoir will also be found Mr. J. Cree's - notes on Mr. Christie's unique collection of books. Mr. •' Cree has further assisted in the production of the book throughout, and has compiled the index and the bibliography fi: of Mr. Christie's writings. In a sense all Mr. Christie's work in the present volume may be looked upon as preparatory, as indicating his pre- occupation with a particular school of Renaissance writers, and as foreshadowing his intention of some day treating of them either in a single synoptical work or in a series of monographs on the same scale as his ' Dolet.' That the scheme came not to fruition is to be attributed only to physical prostration. But what the loss is thereby to the world of scholarship is not capable of expression. \i Preface It only remains to make warm acknowledgment of the permission so com'teously accorded to reprint the essays and papers which form the bulk of this volume: in particular to Mr. John Murray for the four Quarterly articles ; Messrs. Macmillan for that on Bruno ; Messrs, Longman for that on Vanini in England ; Messrs. A. and C. Black for the notice of the Scahgers ; Mr. D. Nutt for the note on the Idyll of Moschus ; Mr. J. Y. W. MacAlister for the paper on a dynasty of librarians ; the Library Asso- ciation, through Mr. Frank Pacy, the Hon. Sec, for the papers on the Catalogues of the Library of the Due de la Valliere, and on Elzevier Bibliography ; the Bibliographical Society through its secretary, Mr. A. W. Pollard, for the paper on * an incunabulum ' of Brescia ; Mr. Knight for the two notes from Notes and Queries ; the Manchester Literary Club, through Mr. W. E. Credland, Hon. Sec, for that on the Marquis de Morante ; Mr. J. St. Loe Strachey for the shorter reviews from the ' Spectator ' and M. Octave Uzanne for the paper on the Chevalier d'Eon from * Le Livre moderne.' The exact locality from which the various papers are taken will be found indicated at the head of each separate item. In a very few instances it will be noticed that the text as given in the present volume differs from the text printed in the somxe from which the particular paper is taken. In such cases the alterations are to be taken as Mr. Christie's own, being made on his own copies or proofs, and as representing his final alterations. CONTENTS PAQE9 Prbfacb , . . . v-vi Memoir ix-lxii Notes on Mr. Christie's Collection of Books . . .Ixiii-lxvii Bibliography of Mr. Christie's Writings . . . Ixix-lxxii ESSAYS AND PAPERS Biographical Dictionaries 1-57 The Forgeries of the Abbe Fourmont 58-91 Clenardus, a Scholar and Traveller of the Renaissance . 92-123 pomponatius, a sceptic of the renaissance . . . 124-160 Was Giordano Bruno Really Burned ? 161-171 Vanini IN England 172-208 The Scaligers 209-222 Chronology of the Early Aldines 223-246 The Aldine Anchor ......... 247-251 An Incunabulum of Brescia 252-256 Marquis de Morante and his Library . . ... 257-278 Catalogues of the Library of the Due de la Valliere . 279-290 The Bignon Family, a Dynasty of Librarians . . . 291-296 Elzevier Bibliography 297-308 De Tribus Impostoribus 809-315 The Earliest Appearance in Print of the First Idyll of MoscHus 316-818 Le Chevalier D'Eon, Bibliophile, Latiniste et Thkologien 819-328 vi Preface It only remains to make warm acknowledgment of the permission so courteously accorded to reprint the essays and papers which form the bulk of this volume: in particular to Mr. John Murray for the four Quarterly articles ; Messrs. Macmillan for that on Bruno ; Messrs. Longman for that on Vanini in England ; Messrs. A. and C. Black for the notice of the Scaligers ; Mr. D. Nutt for the note on the Idyll of Moschus ; Mr. J. Y. W. MacAlister for the paper on a dynasty of librarians ; the Library Asso- ciation, through Mr. Frank Pacy, the Hon. Sec, for the papers on the Catalogues of the Library of the Due de la Valliere, and on Elzevier Bibliography ; the Bibliographical Society through its secretary, Mr. A. W. Pollard, for the paper on * an incunabulum ' of Brescia ; Mr. Knight for the two notes from Notes and Queries ; the Manchester Literary Club, through Mr. W. E. Credland, Hon. Sec, for that on the Marquis de Morante ; Mr. J. St. Loe Strachey for the shorter reviews from the * Spectator ' and M. Octave Uzanne for the paper on the Chevalier d'Eon from * Le Livre moderne.' The exact locality from which the various papers are taken will be found indicated at the head of each separate item. In a very few instances it will be noticed that the text as given in the present volume differs from the text printed in the source from which the particular paper is taken. In such cases the alterations are to be taken as Mr. Christie's own, being made on his own copies or proofs, and as representing his final alterations. viii Contents 'SPECTATOR' REVIEWS PAGES The Chevalier D'J^on 324-829 Giordano Beuno 330-336 Geouge Buchanan, Humanist and Eeformkr . . . 337-342 The Venetian Printing Press 343-349 B:6rastien Castellion, the First Preacher of Religious Liberty 850-855 APPENDICES The Relations of the Church to the State in Respect to Ecclesiastical Law 356-371 A Charge Delivered to the Churchwardens of the Diocese of Manchester at the Chancellor's Visitation OF 1889 371-380 General Index 381-393 ILLUSTRATIONS R. C. Christie at the Age of 23 ... to face title-page R. C. Christie at the agk of 60 „ xlvii EiBSDEN ^^ Iviii Bookplate of R. C. Christie „ 1 The Library at Ribsden „ 855 MEMOIE In the main the life of Kichard Copley Christie was that of a scholar of rare devotion and refinement, and the most enduring monument to his memory is that which his own genius as a scholar has reared. That such will be the judgment of posterity cannot be doubted. But whilst the view of posterity is truer in its perspective, it is less exact in the details of its portraiture. And, writing within a few months of his death, it is possible and necessary to give the nearer view and the truer delineation. He was, in fact, a man of remarkable powers of action, of wide connections and influence as a business man and as a public man, as a practising barrister, magistrate, and eccle- siastical judge, and withal possessed of the keenest interest in every phase of contemporary life. That behind and beneath all this there lay the pure lifelong zeal of the scholar, is proof only of an unusual versatility of nature. That such an endowment was matter of heredity might be supposed, and is partly demonstrable. Paternally he was descended from the Christies of Montrose, and bore the arms of a collateral branch with a difference.^ The Scottish house of Christie has branched widely, and its members have played an important part in the history of several counties and burghs of the northern kingdom. ' The grant of arms to Lorenzo Christie, Esq., father of Eichard Copley Christie, is dated Edinburgh, Office of Lyon King of Arms, November 27, 1866. The arms there granted are as follows : or, a saltire wavy between four mullets pierced sable. Above the shield a helmet befitting his degree, with a mantling gules, doubled argent : and issuing out of a wreath of his liveries is set for a crest a withered holly branch sprouting out leaves proper, and in an escroll over the same the motto sic viresco. The grant recites that .John Christie of Forthra {see page xi), the ancestor of the Montrose Christies, was, according to family tradition, cousin-german of Archibald Christie of Craigtoune, and that the descendants of the said John had been in the habit of carrying the arms of the said Archibald as recorded in the Public Register of all Arms and Bearings in Scotland in or shortlv after 1672. X Memoir Originating in Fifeshire and increasing largely in that county during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, they appear at the opening of the seventeenth century in the counties of Edinburgh, Perth, Stirling, Forfar, Kincardine, and Banff. The annals of the burgh of Stirling bear ample witness to the importance of that one of these branches which claims to be the representative of the house. But the importance of this branch is rivalled by that of the Forfar Christies, who have similarly adorned the annals of the royal burgh of Montrose. The Forfar Christies appear to have derived more imme- diately from the parish of Fettercairn, county Kincardine, where the name occurs at the commencement of the seven- teenth century. John Christie of Fodera, or Forthra, in that parish, who died about 1690, had for his second and fourth sons, John of Balmain, and Alexander of Craig of Garvock. From the elder of these descended a long line, which includes in its record two of the most public-spirited provosts of Montrose, Thomas and his son Alexander, and at least two writers of distinction.' From the younger of the above-named branches — viz, from Alexander Christie, of Craig of Garvock, descended the subject of this memoir. The second Alexander in descent from Alexander of Craig of Garvock had for his fourth son Hector Christie, who migrated to England and became the founder of the Christies of Settle and Manchester. His migration was not aimless or accidental. The commercial revolution of the eighteenth century, which had followed in the wake of the great era of mechanical inventions, was drawing into England the best mercantile and enterprising ' It was to the public spirit of the two provosts that Montrose owed the project of the building of the Lower North Water Bridge across the North Esk in the years 1770-75. The younger provost, Alexander, was also a chief pro- moter of the scheme for an infirmary and asylum in 1781, which subsequently developed into the institutions at Sunnyside and Bridge Street, Montrose — the first of their kind in Scotland. Of the two writers referred to Mr. Christie, the subject of the present Memoir, wrote interesting notices in the Dictionary of National Biography, viz. William Christie, the brother of Alexander the Provost, one of the earliest apostles of Unitarianism in Scotland and America, and Thomas, the son of the same Alexander, a political writer of much note during the French Revolution. Ancestry XI blood of Scotland. Whilst the Bannermans from Perth and the Grants found their way to Manchester, Hector Christie went further afield to Nottingham, to reach Man- chester again later by a second remove. PEDIGEEE OF THE CHRISTIES OF MONTROSE. JOHN CHRISTIE of Fodera or Forthra, in the parish of Fettercairn, d. about 1690. John of Balmain ALEXANDER of Craig of Garvock Alexander, Thomas, BaiUie of Provost of Montrose Montrose, ^ 1685-1765 ALEXANDER, William, Baillie of Provost of Montrose Montrose I Alexander, William, Provost of Montrose, 1748-1823, 1728-1791 Unitarian Writer ALEXANDER Baillie of Montrose, and merchant there Thomas, 1761-1796, Political Writer Alexander David Archibald 4s ^ HECTOR, of Edale, h. 1772, m. 1801, d. 1845 = Mary, d. of Francis Waite, of Lenton, and Sarah Townshend Helen LORENZO Alexander h. 1802, Hector m. June 2, 1824 J^ (at the Parish Church of Lenton, Notts), Ann, d. of Isaac Bayley Lorenzo William, h. March 22, 1825, d. April 12, 1840 Hector, h. April 12, 1828, m. Mary Elizabeth Simpson RICHARD COPLEY, 6. July 22, 1830, m. June 13, 1861, Mary Helen Fletcher William Lorenzo Mary Elizabeth Anne At Nottingham Hector Christie founded a lace manufac- turing business, and there his son Lorenzo was born in 1802. xii Memoir In 1824 Lorenzo married Ann, a daughter of Isaac Bayley and Elizabeth Copley of Lenton Sands. It is through this maternal grandmother, Elizabeth Copley, that Mr. Christie traced his connection with the Copleys of Batley — a connec- tion which is of some interest for his literary life.' After his marriage Lorenzo Christie went to reside at Lenton, and there his three children were born. In 1833 he purchased property at Edale, in Derbyshire, on which was a cotton mill, and he carried on business as a manu- facturer of doubled yarn thereuntil 1861, when he left Edale and moved to near Settle. His wife died at Settle in 1861, and about ten years later he moved to Stackhouse, where he himself died in 1892. Lorenzo Christie would seem to have inherited not only the commercial ability of his Scotch ancestors, but also a large proportion of those literary and artistic gifts which had BO signally characterised them. He was fond of travel, and was an excellent raconteur. Though active minded and an ardent Liberal, he displayed a keen interest in literature, and himself contributed to * Notes and Queries ' many notes on the personalities and events of the first half of the nineteenth century, and on the folklore of Yorkshire and the Midlands. All his qualities, his liberalism, his active-mindedness, and business ability— but, above all, his literary tastes — he trans- mitted to his sons, and, in the case of the younger of them, in double measure. Eichard Copley Christie, his third son, was born at the ' In 1897 Mr. Christie edited the ' Letters of Sir Thomas Copley of Gatton and Soughey, 1572-84,' the volume forming his contribution to the Eoxburghe Club, of which he was a member. His interest in the sixteenth century rela- tions between England and France would at any time account for Mr. Christie being drawn to such a subject. He had previously written a notice of this Copley for the Dictionary of National Biography. But there is no doubt that in the first instance there was also in his mind some tradition of hereditary connection with Sir Thomas Copley. In the introduction to these letters, therefore, he devoted special pains to the elucidation of the pedigree of the Copleys, but was unable to discover the exact link between the Copleys of Yorkshire (Batley) and the Copleys of Surrey, although there was no question in his mind that Sir Eoger (grandfather of Sir Thomas) was a member of the family of Copley of Batley. Amongst his private papers (now in the possession of Mr. Hector Christie) there are many notes and elaborate pedigrees bearing on Boyhood XI 11 Lenton, Notts, on the 22nd of July, 1830. Owing to weak health in his boyhood he was not sent to a public school, but was privately educated by the Eev. T. Coleman, incum- bent of St. James's Church, Nottingham. Matriculating at Lincoln College, Oxford, on the 26th of April, 1849, he graduated B.A. in 1853, and M.A. two years later. His University career is remarkable, in the first place as covering the subject. The gist of the pedigree connecting him with the Copleya of Hoby, and ultimately of Batley, is as follows : — = Sir Richard Copley of Batley, Knight = I 1 Lyonel Copley of Batley I I I I John Copley of Batley I Sir William Copley, tem'p. Queen Mary 1 I i I i I Philip Copley of Sprotburgh III! John Copley of Skelbrook Godfrey Copley of Skelbrook Godfrey, d. 1675 George Copley of Hoby, county Leicester ! George Copley of Hoby I I I Richard Copley = Anne Draper d. 1773 I d. 1830, set. 86 Elizabeth Copley = b. Dec. 10, 1765, m. Jan. 19, 1795, d. 1843, ffit. 76 [?] Isaac Bayley of Lenton, county Notts, d. Nov. 25, 1836, ffit. 80 [? 81] Ann Bayley, h. April 1, 1798 m. June 2, 1824, to Lorenzo Christie, at the Parish Church of Lenton, d. at Langcliffe, near Settle, July 12, 1861 III] xiv Memoir the most momentous time in the history of the University, and, in the second place, from his association with Mark Pattison. The effect which Newman's secession in October 1845 created in the life of Oxford has been depicted by none with greater force than by Pattison himself in his ' Memoirs.' A sudden lull fell upon the place, the feeling as of a swift end of all things without a new beginning visible. But this was only the void sensation of the moment, and it did not need the railway mania of 1847 or the revolutionary move- ments of 1848 to stir the waters. The nightmare of fifteen years had, in fact, passed. The bar:^en theological interests which had brought the ordinary studies of the University to a standstill and to so low an ebb were swept out of mind by a new liberalism and by the new prospect of the physical sciences. The obscurantism of the Tractarian movement, with its abject deference to authority, fled away before the free play of intellect to which Oxford awoke from the moment of Newman's secession. Consequently the few years following 1845 witnessed a flood of reform in the University, reform which practically remodelled the whole of its life and institutions, and made the Oxford of 1850 un- recognisable to the Oxford man of 1846. It was in this time of ferment that Eichard Copley Christie entered Lincoln, and, if in nothing else, the liberal or revolutionary movement left one indelible mark upon his later career and nature. As one result of reform, a new school of law and history was organised at Oxford, and of that school he was the first graduate. Of course the wide general movement of liberal reaction affected all the colleges, but it did not affect them equally. In the case of Lincoln College there was an individual reason why the change should have been specially marked. Under the lead of Pattison the junior Fellows had gradually wrought a trans- formation in the discipline and tone of the college, so that Lincoln, which in 1840 was very low in rank, had risen in 1850 to be one of the best-managed colleges in Oxford. From 1848 to 1851 Pattison, as senior Fellow, was virtually ruler — ^much more absolute a master than he was even later as Rector and Head. Undergraduate Days xv It is much to be regretted that we do not possess from the pen of Mr. Christie any detailed account of the life of Lincoln College during his undergraduate period. In the Life of Pattison which he contributed to the ' Dictionary of National Biography ' he sketched briefly from his own recollections Pattison's method as a teacher. It is not possible to doubt that from Ivir. Christie's pen the words are also partly autobiographical, and that they have reference to the routine of his own undergraduate days : — ' He was an ideal teacher, grudging no amount of time or labour to his pupils, teaching them how to think and drawing out and developing their mental faculties. He excited the warmest affection on their part, and their success in the schools, if not always commensurate with their or his wishes, was considerable. For several years he invited two or three undergraduates to join him for some weeks in the long vacation at the lakes, in Scotland or elsewhere, and he assisted them in their studies without fee.' And again, speaking of the disgraceful intrigue which lost Pattison the Eectorship in 1851 : — ' In the account of his feelings, which he wrote thirty years afterwards, he does himself injustice. He did not fall into the state of mental and moral degrada- tion which he there graphically describes, and the language which he uses of his state is greatly exaggerated. The routine of tuition may have become as weary as he repre- sents it, but while his great depression was obvious to all who came in contact with him at this time, his lectures — on Aristotle and on Thucydides — were as able, as suggestive, and as stimulating as ever, and, except for the interruption of a serious illness, the result no doubt of the shock which he had sustained, his interest in his pupils and his efforts to aid them in their studies and to promote their success in the schools were as great as ever.' That these words of Mr, Christie describe his own experiences at the hands of Pattison is plain from the latter's own words : — Nor did I spare myself in vacation. I adopted a plan of taking four favourite pupils, one year to Bowness, and another set xvi Memoir the next year to Inverary, for a month each time. I thought the living together might enable me to make more impression upon them than mere college relations allowed of. I did not coach them in their books, but tried to get them interested in poetry and literature, having found that even our best were very narrow and schoolboy-like in their reading. In this respect the plan did not answer my expectation ; but I can never regret an experiment which left me as its residuum two of the most valued friendships I have enjoyed since — that of R. C. Christie and William Stebbing. Mr. Stebbing has kindly furnished his own recollections of these reading parties in the following words : — Christie came up to Oxford with a character unusually formed for one of his age. Irreproachable in conduct and incapable of coarseness even in language, he was yet a man of the world in comparison with me. With him — naturally on his guard against misconstruction, shy and sensitive — acquaintance with the art of life must have been a product of instinct rather than experience. He had received his instruction, I think, from private tutors, and I do not suppose he had mixed more with men or even boys than ordinary lads thus brought up. On his part he was willing to cultivate the society of professed reading men. We acquired a habit of interchanging evening visits for ' confabulations,' as the Sub-Eector, who occasionally honoured us by a call, would nickname our profound discussions on the universe. But Mr. Pattison's generous invitation to us, along with William Yates, to join him in an unpaying reading-party at Inverary confirmed friendliness into friendship. Our tutor and I shared the same lodgings ; but Yates and Christie, while having rooms in another house, boarded with us, and we were together throughout the day. Our admired but formidable chief in his fascinating ' Memoirs ' has stated that his motive in these self-sacrificing expeditions was a desire to interest a few select pupils in poetry and literature. If the plan may not have fully answered his expectation in this respect, doubtless he was not himself conscious — he really was too modest to have understood — how much any apparent coldness towards topics outside our text-books was due to the awe he inspired. Courage was required to erect a brand-new, four-square edifice, philosophical, social, or literary, with the prospect ever imminent of a douche of cold water, most amiably meant and all in the sacred interest of truth, but not the less sure to wash clean away the whole sensitively fragile structure. Still the audacity Professor at Owens xvii was occasionally forthcoming, and the sufferers not seldom enjoyed the shock even at the moment. At all events, they profited by it in the long future to an extent vs^hich their master thinker and critic was never vain enough to appreciate. It was a month which the three pupils — perhaps their guide, philosopher, and friend himself — never forgot ; which the one survivor recalls with affectionate regret for a memorable companionship. In 1853 Mr. Christie graduated first class in the school of Law and Modern History, then newly established at Oxford. In the lists only one other candidate, Thomas Salt of Balliol, appears in the first class. Henry Hallam was one of the examiners on the occasion, with R. Michell and W. C. Lake, and it was probably the high opinion formed by Hallam of the young student's work which led to Mr. Christie's appointment at Owens. In the same year he was elected by the Council of Owens College to the Faulkner Chair of Political Economy and Commercial Science, to which was added at the same time the Chair of History. Amongst others Hallam himself congratulated the new professor on his election. His letter on the occasion is worth preserving : — Rickhurst, Bromley : Jan. 4, 1854. Dear Sir, — I sincerely congratulate you on your success in obtaining the Professorship at Manchester, of which I had been apprised by Mr. James Heywood. He had previously written to me respecting you, and, with a jealousy of which you are likely to find proofs in that Institution, was solicitous to know whether you had very High Church opinions. I told him, of course, that our examination had nothing to do with such matters, and that my acquaintance with you was limited to that. The truth is that the Dissenters claiming the name of Liberal are, in fact, the narrowest of men sauf quelqtics exceptions ; and Oxford is a bugbear in their eyes. However, I have no doubt that you will steer a very good course ; at all events you have obtained an honourable distinction, which, as far as I can judge, you have well deserved. I am. Dear Sir, faithfully yours, Henry Hallam. It is a little amusing to find that there was yet another a xviii Memoir doubt in the minds of the electing body of the college besides this portentously important one of High Churchism at which Hallam naturally, as a Tory, has his somewhat spiteful fling. At the time of his candidature Mr. Christie not only was exceedingly young, but had the additional disadvantage of appearing so. There was accordingly some trepidation in the minds of the Council. One of the electors, Mr. S. Fletcher, who was amongst the earliest and most earnest supporters of the college, on returning from the election, remarked that the new professor's credentials were excellent but that ' he was so young.' In order to appreciate the task which lay before Mr. Christie at Owens it is necessary to bear in mind what the college was in these its early days. He became a professor in it only two years after the institution had opened its doors. But not only was the college young, it was also struggling — struggling against the educational condition of Manchester at the time, struggling for a proper standard of qualification in its men. In its original conception Owens College had been planned with a loftiness of purpose which proved for long unrealisable. The class of students which the scheme of the college contemplated simply did not exist at first ; and it was not until after some years of determined perseverance on the lines laid down that the college succeeded in calling a better class of student into existence by literally pulling up the schools of the neighbourhood to the level of its own requirements. Until that better class of student emerged it had to content itself with such material as offered and to spend half its force on night courses arranged both for general students and for schoolmasters. But not merely was the work of the college at first necessarily on this low level — practically that of a day and evening continuation institu- tion — it was also apparently doomed to death. After the first session the numbers showed a decline, and the local press spoke of the place as a mortifying failure. To such an institution and at such a point in its history it was that Mr. Christie came in 1853. It surely required courage and conviction of the highest order to adopt for Modern Historical School xix such a class of student as he there found, and at such a time, the elevation of tone and purpose which he instantly did adopt. It is hardly possible to convey an adequate con- ception of the merit of such an attitude, so far has Owens College moved away from its original scale and tone, and so far also has the scientific study of history moved away from the standpoint occupied in this country in 1850. The origin of the modern school of historical science will some day, it is to be hoped, form the subject of investigation. If 80, it will be a most interesting one. Without doubt it ia partly traceable to Germany, as is also so much more of what is best and most characteristic of the intellectual develop- ments of the last generation in England. In its most severely scientific form its foundation is to be ascribed to the practical classes which Ranke got round him in 1830. A practical class in history is a powerful but also a dan- gerous weapon. The method of instruction will drift inevitably into diplomatic — questions of formularies, of palaeography, of textual criticisms, of comparison and derivation of authorities, and so on. The German thesis system, with its immense encouragement of early specialisa- tion, was all that was needed to give expression to the change in method, and from one of its sides, at any rate, the new school was already complete by the time of Mr. Christie's early professorial days. But in 1850 we knew nothing of these things in England. And further than that, it is to be borne in mind that in its completeness, or in its more exaggerated form, the German school or method of history never has been, or is only now at this moment being, followed in this country. In following the lead of Germany in these years from 1850 onwards we have beneficially modified the parent institution. The result is due partly to the individuality of a few English historians who, whilst breathing the atmosphere of the most rigorously scientific method, and displaying all the minuteness of care and research, and all the severe impartiality and detachment of the most insistent scientists, have yet, from their own native genius, never lost their hold on the unity of history as a study, their conception of continuity, their power of synthesis. XX Me7noir In tracing sncii a development we have in mind such names as Buckle and Gardiner, two minds the apparent difference of which is really a matter of time and not of kind. But there are other names, too, which have contributed to the general result, and among them are those of Pattison and Christie. I say this advisedly and without hyperbole. For with the MS. of Mr. Christie's earliest lectures on history before me, alongside his later and maturer work, there is visible to me through the whole that very line of development which has characterised English historical work during the last gene- ration, together with that higher quality of synthesis and reverence for the oneness and continuity of all human phenomena which has saved English historical scholarship from the quagmire of German specialisation. In his later historical work — meaning not so much the ' Dolet ' as the introductions he wrote to the Copley letters and the ' Annales Cestrienses ' — Mr. Christie showed that he could probe and estimate original authorities with a patience and a balance and an impartiality equal to those of any of the most professed and rigid scientists. In his earlier work, as evidenced in these lectures, we see nothing of this. We see only that reverence for the continuity and unity of history, that conception of synthesis and style, which has always distinguished the best English historical writing. But the memorable point is that this early conception was not effaced by the later, and herein lies the merit of such names as Pattison's and his. As a result, English historical work has not been given over immaturely, body and soul, to rigid science and arid microscopic specialisation. If it is so being given over at the present day, then we need another generation of Pattison and Christie — of pure devotees to the human, as opposed to the scientific, interest in history. As a further result — and this is more immediately germane to the purposes of this memoir — it is not too much to say that Christie introduced to Manchester, materiahstic Manchester, in 1853, a conception of history, lofty and elevating for its time, and capable, as we now know, of all the later developments which have been since traced. The following extracts from his early lectures at Owens display Early Lectures at Owens xxi at once his method of handling historical subjects at so early an age of his life (he was only 23), and at the same time this abiding interest in the human side of history, this per- vading and permanent sense of the continuity of all human life.i ^ The nature of the duties of a teacher of history differs most materially, as I conceive, from the kind of duties required from a teacher of most sciences, as mathematics or chemistry. Of these the rudiments can be taught, and not only so, must be taught to the student on his first introduction to the science. In mathe- matics every step rests on what goes before, and a knowledge of the definitions and axioms is necessary as a beginning. But in history this is not the case ; here are no rudiments, no definitions necessary as well to be known as understood before advancing further. History cannot be taught ; yet the duties of a professor of history are by no means unimportant. He has to guide and direct. Though no knowledge given in lectures can supply the place of the diligent and hard reading of the student, yet his way may be shortened, and his difficulties lightened, by the assistance of a teacher. Again, a lecturer on history must be content that every remark which he makes, every direction which he gives, sball be received, not like a mathematical proposition, as indisputable, and only needing examination to be understood and its truth per- ceived ; but as an opinion which may or may not be true, and which, even if true, has most probably been and still is im- pugned by many who have specious arguments to bring forward against it. One chief obstacle to the study of history forming a part of the education of the young consists in the practical passions and interests which it engages ; and if this be the case in ancient ' The only one of Mr. Christie's early lectures which was published was one ' On the Study of History,' which formed the inaugural address at Owens for the session 1854-55. The lecture was printed by the Trustees of the College (Longmans, 1854), and it also occurs in a little volume, entitled the Popular Lecturer, Vol. i., 1855. The class lectures, which are stillpreservedin manuscript (manifestly incomplete), comprise courses on the History of France in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries ; on the Reign of the Tudors; on the General and Political State of Europe from 1450 to 1600. There are also collections of notes for a course on Ancient History. It will be noticed that even at this early stage the main line of historical interest was that which dominated him throughout life. ^ From the lecture ' On the Study of History,' ut supra. XX ii Memoir history (when the state of society and of opinion was so far different from our own), in which the toryism of Mitford leads him to vilify Demosthenes, and the radicalism of Grote to defend Cleon, more especially is it so in modern history. To it nearly all the great questions on which men now most widely differ from each other, properly belong ; and however much the lecturer may desire to avoid controversy, and to give with fairness and impar- tiality a view of both sides of any historical question, yet, in the discharge of his duty as an expounder of history to the best of his ability, he must necessarily express, or at least indicate, his own opinions — opinions which some of his hearers may consider erroneous. He must, in criticising writers, prefer one book to another, and give his reasons for this preference. He must express his admiration or disapproval of men, actions, and political institutions ; and while he does this in accordance with his own convictions indeed, but with an earnest desire after truth, it will be for his hearers, in the same spirit, to carry with them to their studies the advice which he has offered, the criticisms which he has made, and the political and religious principles with which he seems to be affected, and to make these the subjects of their own deliberation and investigation. . . . . . . You have no more studied the history of Charles V. by such a perusal of Eobertson than you have that of the insurrection of 1745 by reading ' Waverley.' Yet this is the idea which a vast number of persons, even of those who read, have of history. They look upon it as a study, to be pursued certainly, but as a relaxa- tion after graver pursuits. . . . To study history really, so as to derive any substantive benefit from it, you must work. You must employ as much energy, as much thought, as much system, as you do in mathematics or logic. ^ The social sciences can be studied in a manner truly profitable only by the aid of history. This great storehouse of all political experience contains the only examples proper to enlighten us on the means of attaining the two-fold design which it ought to be the aim of every government to accomplish, to make men happy and at the same time to make them virtuous. The shortness of our life, the impossibility of taking in at one view all the conse- ' From MS. lectures on ' The History of France in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.' Early Lecttires at Owens xxiii quencea of a mere principle, make theories dangerous in matters of government unless we support them on a basis of facts, unless we correct them by their aid. It is true, on the other hand, that since several causes often simultaneously influence the same fact, and since series of events have often no connection with one another, that the study of facts without philosophy would be no less deceptive than that of philosophy without facts. To derive any advantage from history, we ought constantly to explain and to arrange events by the aid of principles, and at the same time to discover principles in the chain of events, and to develop them by the practical study of their results. Thus history invites the man who knows how to reflect, to the most constant and most sublime exercise of thought ; for him from the shock of revolutions she brings forth great moral truths ; the spark of philosophy shines across the darkness of time and its clearness penetrates into the depth of chaos. On a sudden this light makes us perceive the connection of incidents which we had believed isolated. We see noble virtues produced in the heart which call for and assist noble action. We see on the other hand great errors in politics or in religion, casting their funereal shade over entire ages. The better history makes us understand man, the greater indulgence we have for his passions and his errors, for it shows us that almost always their cause is far behind him. But it also teaches us to attach ourselves with ardour to what is true in principle, and to what is pure in morals, since it shows us how many dis- positions are insincere, how many hearts are corrupted by wretched political institutions, since it brings to light the terrible crime against humanity which those commit who take away all restraints from power, who make religion a political instrument, who, changing citizens into subjects, destroy at once the tie of duty and the love of country. In these various relations the history of France does not give place to any in useful lessons and distinguished examples. If men could become wise by knowing what they ought to avoid, the eight centuries which we have gone through in this history have already sufficiently directed us. The genealogists pretend that Philip le Bel was the forty-fifth monarch of France ; a very few of these princes, it is true, are lost in obscurity ; we have studied all the rest ; we have seen among them characters opposed to one another, talents of different degrees ; yet there is not one who could inspire us with an instant of regret that we had not lived under his reign ; not one has united his name to the recollection XX iv Memoir of a happy and virtuous age. Whence happens it, then, that in so long a time we have not found any period on which our minds dehght to rest ? It is because we have seen power founded by violence, increased by craft, sometimes united, sometimes divided in a hundred different ways, but have not seen any securities in the constitution of the kingdom either for the governed or for the governors. From this absence of principles could only result that we should find neither love of their people among the kings, nor love of their country among the people ; when force and fear reign, duty has no opportunity for showing itself and virtue cannot be developed. Any devotedness is impossible in him who is always constrained, nor is any generous resolution allowed him who never has any choice. A Government without liberty and without principle has never been able to produce anything but the unhappiness and degradation of all. During these eight centuries the religious order was no better than the civil. We have seen the Church firmly fixed in its power ; we have seen its ministers surrounded by power, laden with wealth, having at their disposal, with which to take vengeance on their enemies, numerous armies and formidable tribunals ; we have seen tnem commanding consciences, and finding no more rebels to the faith which they wished to impose ; but we have not seen religion founded on an inquiry into what there was of truth in the system of the universe, of purity in the heart of man ; we have never seen any agreement with that fundamental revela- tion which God has engraved upon our conscience ; on the contrary, during these eight centuries, we have seen the authority of the Church constantly employed to confuse the notions of right and wrong, to falsify oaths, to annihilate morality ; since nothing could be more fatal to this last than the power which the priest arrogated of tracing its rules and of dispensing with them at his convenience. The lesson of history is yet incomplete if it only shows us what to hate and what to fear, if it does not at the same time make known to us what we ought to desire or love, if it never brings us into contact with generous sentiments, if it never causes our hearts to beat with admiration nor makes us shed tears of tenderness. We have surveyed eight centuries of the history of the French without ever meeting with these pleasures, or with these noble lessons ; and we say it with bitter regret that we have still a long route before us, strewn no more than the past with flowers. Many of our hearers knowing that Philip le Bel first Early Lectures at Oicens xxv assembled the deputies of the commons of his kingdom, and that to accomplish the projects which he had formed he sought support among the burghers, will perhaps expect to see the nation at last enter on the scene of history, and elevated sentiments, patriotism and the love of liberty combine themselves with the ancient system of government. They will be deceived. Philip le Bel understood the nation to which he seemed to give rights ; no elevated sentiment as yet animated it ; from it the moralist had nothing to hope, the despot nothing to fear. In its history for a long time yet, we shall find nothing which kindles the heart, nothing which excites enthusiasm, nothing which elevates man above the cold calculation of selfishness, which reveals to him the power of self-sacrifice, which makes him comprehend heroism. But liberty was not for a long time yet to be secured in France, and no morality is possible to him who not being free has no choice. ^ Another plan which suggested itself to me was to continue the course, which I delivered last year from this place, on the constitutional history of England. But apart from my wish to make each course — though part of a general plan — distinct and complete in itself, so that one course, though in harmony with, should yet not be a mere continuation of the other, it scarcely seems to me that the leading points of interest under the Tudors are constitutional ones. The constitutional history of England under the Tudors, though both interesting and important, is less directly so than the same subject under the Plantagenets or Stuarts. The age of the Tudors, though one in which England made immense progress in civilisation, in wealth, in literature, and one which yields in importance to no century in our annals, is yet not an age of direct constitutional progress. Having thus noticed tw^o other plans which I might have adopted, it remains for me now to sketch out for you the one upon which I have decided, in order that you may be prepared what to expect, and, thus prepared, may with more readiness and ease accompany me through the reigns of the Tudors. I purpose, then — as the official announcement of these lectures states— to call your attention to the leading points of interest in the history of England under the Tudors, and to the writers who ' From MS. lectures on ' The Eeign of the Tudors.' xxvi Memoir have treated on the whole period or on one or more points of interest in it. The real subject of the century, the one pervading idea round which must be grouped others as subordinates and accessories, was the religious one. Tliis it was that pervaded the politics, the wars, the literature of the century, nay, that influenced the out- ward acts even of those statesmen and sovereigns who felt least its spirit in their hearts, or paid the least reverence to it in their lives. . . . ... In discussing the causes of the Eeformation and the actions and characters of the chief actors in it, as well Eoman Catholics as Protestants, great caution will be needful on my part, as well as some indulgence on yours. While I shall studiously avoid harsh criticisms on particular persons, as well as all imputation of motives — a fault which so many writers fall into ; while I shall endeavour to use no expressions which can hurt the feelings or prejudices of those with whom I may have the misfortune to differ ; while I shall strive to be suggestive rather than dogmatic, guiding you so that you may draw your own conclusions instead of giving you my own ready formed, it will yet be impossible for me to do other than express the opinions which I have formed and the convictions which I hold, opinions and convictions which can hardly fail to be distasteful to some at least among my hearers, since the subject is one upon which almost every person has a decided opinion of his own, an opinion held the more warmly since it is based on his religious convictions, or at least is guided by the opinions of the religious society to which he professes to belong. . . . ... I propose, then, not so much to relate to you facts or my own opinion upon them, though this last must necessarily often be done in my recommendations of books, as to direct you to the various writers from whom you may form your own conclusions. This will be one main object of the lectures, to inform you what you will find in the principal writers to whom I shall refer. The excuse for the length to which these extracts from the early lectures of Mr. Christie have been given lies in the fact that at the time they were delivered history was a new subject in the academic world of England ; Owens College was a young institution in that world ; and Mr. Christie himself a neophyte in the study. Under such circumstances they furnish evidence of the high stand which the young IVork at Owens xxvii professor took, of the elevation of tone and purpose with which he approached his work, but most of all of the complete absence of any contempt for the tone or quality of the men he met in the lecture-room. ' Judging from the experience of a single course,' says Principal Hopkinson, ' his lectures must have been carefully prepared, clear in statement, scholarly in style. Sometimes he would engage with a student in argument on some point of interest — for a new student a formidable but useful ordeal.' Another of his pupils gives us a closer and more personal touch. * My impression of him was that he was a true disciple of his teacher [here incorrectly supposed to have been Hallam] and that he tried to weigh and discriminate so minutely that his really careful teaching lost much of its interest and force. He was nervous and sensitive to a degree, and I have never ceased to regret certain silly jokes which we played on him and which evidently caused him real mental suffering.' But Mr. Christie was not merely teaching history at Owens, and meanwhile developing his own ideal of his- torical work and method. He took an active-minded share in the government and organisation of the institution. He was one of the promoters of the evening classes started at the college in 1854, and when the Manchester Working Men's College was inaugurated in 1858 he was placed on the committee and taught the English History class. In every direction he took an active and important part in the dis- cussions carried on with a view to establishing Owens on a secure basis. Among the suggestions offered by him in a report drawn up for the use of the trustees in 1856 — during these times of the college's early trials — were those of the establishment of a preparatory school and of a diploma of associateship — a proposal which did more to give tone to the early institution than anything else in its history. In May of this same year 1856, Mr. Christie received a flattering offer from Jowett of Balliol, of the Professorship of General History and Political Economy at the Elphin- stone College, Madras. ' From what I know of you,' wrote Jowett, ' I should be very happy to propose your xxviii Memoir name to Mr. Singer and Mr. Huxley, if you wished it.' The offer was coupled with the prospect of considerable chance of rising in the educational department of the Civil Service. But though Jowett wrote a second letter in the following October, again pressing the matter on Mr. Christie's attention, it does not appear to have been enter- tained. Mr. Christie had made his choice, and to that choice he remained unalterably true. His connection with Manchester was to prove an unbroken and lifelong one. In all, his work as a professor at Owens, in one faculty or another, covered a matter of sixteen years. He was first appointed to the Faulkner Chair in November 1853. In the following year he was made Professor of Political Economy in addition, and in 1865 Professor of Law and Jurisprudence. In the following year, 1866, he resigned the History Chair to A. W. Ward, and the Chair of Political Economy to Stanley Jevons. Three years later he resigned that of Law to James Bryce (now the Eight Hon.). It is surely given to few men to have three such successors. Mr. Christie's retirement from active participation in the teaching work of Owens was due to the increase of his practice at the Bar. He had entered at Lincoln's Inn on the 21st of November 1854, and was called to the Bar on the 6th of June three years later, his call being moved by John William Willcock. Commencing practice in Man- chester, his connection as a barrister grew rapidly until he became the acknowledged leader of the Chancery Bar in Manchester. Principal Hopkinson, who had been a pupil at his chambers after coming from the same college at Oxford, bears testimony to his high professional standing. * In court — sometimes he was engaged in nearly every case in the then short sittings of the Palatine Court at Manchester — he was a model of correct demeanour and of accurate statement. The local Bar owes much to the high standard of professional conduct he always maintained. He set his face firmly against the pernicious practices which prolonged and increased the expense of arbitration cases. Though well aware that his attitude in this respect prevented the increase of his practice with work of the kind, he adhered firmly to Work at the Bar xxix it, and those who had the best opportunities of knowledge felt that no one had a higher sense of personal and pro- fessional honour. Pupils found his chambers an excellent school of training, and among them was the present leader of the Chancery Bar in Manchester.' As an illustration of his forensic manner and ability, and as a confirmation — merely accidental and passing — of Prin- cipal Hopkinson's words, there has survived in print a full account of the case of Milner v. Reed (as to the title or designation of the Oldfield Lane doctor), in February 1870, before Vice-Chancellor Wickens, in which Mr, Christie was (successfully) engaged, James Bryce being with him.' Mr. Christie filled the office of President of the Manchester Law Library Society from 1872 to 1878. It was ill-health, and that alone, which led to his retire- ment from legal practice in 1876. But so high had his reputation at the Manchester Bar been, that even after his retirement he was compelled to act for a few old clients, who, so long as he could be prevailed upon, would have no other counsel. But though unequal any longer to bear the physical strain of practice in court, he was still able for many years to discharge the less onerous duties of magistrate and ecclesiastical judge. It is probably not generally known that Prince Lee, the first Bishop of Manchester, contemplated making Mr. Christie his Chancellor. So great a value did he attach to Mr. Christie's legal advice that he would never sit in a clergy trial without the latter's presence and support. What he was prevented from doing, his successor was enabled to carry out within two years of Bishop Lee's death. In December 1871, Bishop Fraser offered Mr. Christie the Chancellorship of the Diocese of Manchester. The ap- pointment, which dated formally from 1 January 1872, was a peculiarly fitting one, in view not only of Mr. Christie's eminence at the Bar and attainments as a historian, but also by reason of his interests, tastes, and quaHfications. ' A full report of the case was given in a pamphlet of twenty-nine pages by John Heywood, Manchester. XXX Memoir It had been for long a desire with him to become an advocate of Doctors Commons, and only the practical abohtion of that institution prevented his wish from being carried out. Furthermore he had during the episcopate of Bishop Lee sat on three several occasions as assessor with the Bishop at the trial of criminous clergy of the diocese, and reference has been already made to the estimation in which Bishop Lee held him. His interest in Church matters — in Church of England matters — was, however, not merely that of a lawyer, nor even merely that of a student of ecclesiastical history. It was in a fuller sense that of a citizen, of a man of the world moved by the keenest interest in the Church as one of the most important phases and institutions of our national life. So keen and practical indeed was that interest that it even occasionally approached the polemical, and led him, as will be seen, at least on the occasion of one of his Charges as Chancellor, to misunderstanding at the hands of the local press. Any one who has had access to Mr. Christie or to his private papers could not fail to be struck by the enduring tenacity of his interest in everything relating to the Church of England, even after his failing health had begun to seriously restrict his activity. The one impression left on my mind after years of intercourse is that he was potentially a born canon jurist, and that if he had lived a century or two centuries earlier, when Canon Law had not become the enfeebled ghost it now is, he would have ranked with the very greatest Canonists of the Protestant world. This is a deliberate opinion advanced in full knowledge of the devotion which he showed, on other sides of his nature, to the cause of pure reason and full knowledge, too, of his dislike of dogma. One further requisite he had, and that in a supreme degree, for the post of ecclesiastical judge of a diocese. He was possessed of pre-eminent personal tact. His hearing of a case in the Consistory Court was most patient and sympa- thetic, his judgment absolutely clear, and his decisions were invariably accepted without demur. ' Dignified,' says Prin- cipal Hopkinson, speaking of his work as Chancellor, ' free from bias, anxious to prevent unseemly disputes, possessing Work as Chancellor xxxi the power of grasping the essential point of a case which is developed by legal training, and yet without legal pedantry, he secured respect for the tribunal while he discouraged useless litigation.' In these latter words Principal Hopkin- son touches upon another aspect of Mr. Christie's work as Chancellor which deserves permanent record — the deter- mined stand which he took against useless litigation and the consistent effort he made to minimise both litigation and fees. He simplified the procedure and greatly reduced the cost of applications to the court. In the farewell address to the court which he delivered in December 1893, on the occasion of his retirement from the Chancellorship, he recalled to the mind of his auditors the main results of his twenty- two years of service as ecclesiastical judge. It was probably the only occasion on which he referred to his own work in public, but the utterance was more than justified, erring indeed, if at all, only on the side of dignified restraint. ' It had been his constant endeavour, he said, to make the court as little burdensome as possible to the diocese generally and to the suitors — to make it in fact, as it was in theory, the forum domesticum of the Bishop in respect of all those matters that came before it. He had the satisfaction to know that he had been able both to simplify the procedure and to greatly reduce the cost of proceedings in the court, so that whereas the cost of the simplest faculty at the time he was appointed was twelve or fourteen guineas, it had been reduced to two guineas. It had been his constant endeavour to prevent hostile and contentious litigation, and to induce the litigants to arrange their differences in a friendly manner — as the representative of a bishop sitting in his court ought to do, when the cases before the court were less often matters of law or fact than matters which were left by law to the discretion of the judge and in respect of which the personal feelings, and it might be the personal prejudices, of the suitors were largely concerned. It was an additional satisfaction to him to know that, although a greater number of faculties had been each year applied for and a greater number granted in the Manchester Consistory Court than in the Consistory Court of any other English diocese, there had xxxii Memoir not been a single appeal from any decision of his during the twenty-two years he had held office.' In turning over the accounts of the sittings of the Consistory Court there emerge, however, other phases of Mr. Christie's character besides the unfailing dignity and courtesy with which he conducted the proceedings. In matters on which he felt called upon for a clear expression of opinion, he was as strong and fearless as he was otherwise urbane. At the risk of raising long laid controversial dust I feel driven to cite some typical expressions such as these, for they throw a strong light upon his own opinions and temperament. The cases also in connection with which these expressions of opinion were uttered constitute facts in his professional life as an ecclesiastical judge, and in so far they call necessarily for notice in any memoir of him. Further than that, it is considered that on points where strong differences of opinion still exist the uttered decisions of so eminent a Chancellor will still command attention, as being those of a judge merely — those of one who, by the very quality of his legal learning, stood outside and above the mere controversial strife itself. In the case of an application for a faculty made by the rector and churchwardens of St. John the Baptist, Hulme, Mr. Christie (12th of June 1872) addressed the following remarks to the counsel for the petitioners : — ' There is another point of which I am bound to take official notice, and that is the constant use of the word " altar " in your answer. I need not remind you of the remarks of Mr. Justice Willes in a recent case, in which he censured even the clerk to the Justices for using the word altar ; and, having regard to the judgment of the Privy Council in the case of Westerton v. Liddell, I cannot allow a plea to be filed in this Court which calls the communion table an " altar." If this case goes elsewhere I shall be blamed for allowing such a word to go from this Court.' Later in the same month — 24th of June 1872 — he de- livered a lengthy and learned judgment on the vexed and difficult question of chancel gates and parclose screens as raised by this application from St. John the Baptist, Hulme, Judgments as Chancellor xxxiii for a faculty for certain alterations there. The record of this decision is as follows : — The learned Chancellor delivered a lengthy judgment, in which he reviewed the legal arguments in the case. He said the two main questions which he had to decide were, first, whether the proposed alterations were in conformity with or in any way violated the law ; and if he should be of opinion that they did not violate the law, whether, in the exercise of that discretion which the law reposed in him, the alterations were expedient. He did not find in the act on petition any allegation that any of the proposed alterations were illegal, nor that they contravened any usage of the Church of England which must be considered to have the force of law. Two objections, however, as to the legality of the proposed alterations were raised at the Bar. It was con- tended that the greater part of the alterations were in the nature of superfluous ornaments, and that it was clearly the intention of the petitioners to gild and deck with superfluous ornaments the proposed gates and screens in such a manner as to be contrary to the homily against peril of idolatry and the usages of the Church. A very careful examination of the plans had convinced him that there was nothing whatever in the designs or in the ornamental work itself which in any way could be objectionable upon any legal grounds. The defendants also alleged that it was not legal for the church to be open all day long for private prayer, and that, even though legal, it was contrary to the usage of the Church of England. He was certainly surprised to find such a proposition seriously put forward. He was unable to see a single authority to suggest in the slightest degree the impropriety of the church being open for private prayer, and he should be very sorry to sanction any such proposition as that it was illegal or improper for a church to be so open. Having dealt at considerable length with the legal points involved in the petition and objections, the Chancellor said he had next to deal with the question whether the alterations proposed would really add to the seemhness and con- venience of the church, and would be for the benefit or comfort of the parishioners, and especially for the church-going parishioners. The first alteration proposed by the petition was to replace the wooden flooring at the east end of the chancel with tiling. No objection had been made, and he, therefore, had no hesitation whatever in granting that alteration. The second alteration was to i-eplace the present chancel stalls by new and more convenient b xxxiv Memoir seats and desks, and that also he would grant. The third proposal he also granted — namely, to replace the present parclose screens by iron ones. The fourth alteration was to place a low wall, 3 ft. 3 in. high and 6 ft. 3 in. long, on each side of the chancel arch, with metal crestings thereon and gates between. These gates, it was alleged, were needed to prevent any fingering with choir books, altar cloth, &c., as also access to the choir vestry and the organ. His first impression upon reading the judgment of Dr. Lushington, in Westerton v. Liddell, was that that decision would justify him in refusing the prayer of the petitioners, but he had felt compelled to come to the conclusion that Dr. Lushington'g remarks could not be considered as laying down any rule on the subject of a screen and gates. It had been pointed out by Mr. Leresche that in the adjoining parish of St. Mary's, Hulme, there were gates between the chancel and the nave ; but he was not informed when or under what circumstances they were erected. He had ascertained that these gates were there when the church was consecrated by the late Bishop of Manchester, on the 12th of November 1858, less than three years after Dr. Lushington 's judgment in Westerton v. Liddell, and less than two years after the decision of the Privy Council in the same case. Now, no one who knew the late Bishop of Manchester, and especially none who was ever associated with him, as he [Mr. Christie] was, in the admin- istration of the law, but must have been struck as well with his great knowledge of ecclesiastical law as with the anxious care and con- sideration which he gave lest in any matter the law should be violated. He was bound to come to the conclusion that in St. Mary's Bishop Lee found nothing in any respect objectionable in the screens and gates, and that they were ti'eated by him as matters of absolute indifference. The only objection taken in the act on petition to the screen and gates was that the fastening and locking up of the chancel would interfere with the proper supervision of the church- wardens ; but it was not proposed to place a lock upon those gates, but simply a bolt. The matter was one wholly unobjection- able and indifferent in itself, and he was bound not to follow any private opinion of his own, but to grant the prayer of the petition for the erection of the proposed low screens and gates. He was so desirous, however, and bound to be so careful that no abuse should arise from the gates, that he proposed the insertion in the faculty of words requiring the gates to be wide open during the celebration or ministration of any and every divine service, sacra- ment, rite, or office, and if he should find this part of the faculty opinion on Chancel Gates xxxv disobeyed, it would be his duty, upon a proper application being made to him, to issue a monition to the minister requiring obedience to the faculty, and to condemn the minister in the costs of the proceedings, and necessary so to modify the arrangement of the screen and gates as to prevent a possibility of a violation of the provision. The fifth alteration, relating to the removal of the pulpit from the north to the south side, he thought an impi-ove- ment, and would therefore allow it. He should also grant the proposal in regard to the Communion table being made three inches longer, it being understood that there was no intention to make it narrower. He objected, however, to the proposal to raise the height of the present Communion table and to place an additional step between the nave and the Communion step. The additional step must certainly cause inconvenience to the parishioners, and especially to the aged and infirm persons who might desire to receive the Holy Communion. The present steps were unusually numerous, and several of them did not appear to have been sanctioned by any faculty or any other authority. He should therefore insert in the faculty a provision that the height of the Communion table above the floor of the chancel should not be greater than at present, and that there should be no more steps than at present between the table and the nave. He would like- wise agree to the seventh alteration for cutting the present reredos in two, the removing the two ends laterally north and south, and inserting a dossal cloth, the object being to get rid of the present objectionable empty side spaces ; at the same time he expressed a hope that the tables containing the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments, which had been removed, would be restored to a convenient position in or near the east end of the church. Ten years later, however, Chancellor Christie had slightly modified his opinion on this question of chancel gates, as will be seen from the following case. In December 1882 an apphcation was made before him for a faculty to erect in St. Gabriel's Church, Hulme, a low stone wall and iron gates across the entrance to the chancel, together with other minor alterations, such as moving the pulpit and altar steps, &c. The record of his judgment in this case is as follows : — The Chancellor said the alterations which were proposed appeared to be very proper, except in one particular, and that was b2 xxxvi Meinoir as regarded the erection of iron gates across the entrance to the chancel. He had on two occasions decreed the granting of a faculty for the erection of gates across a chancel, and he had no personal objection to the gates, and if it were a matter of his own discretion, or in the discretion of that court, he would have no hesitation in gi-anting the faculty on the present occasion. But since the last faculty that was granted his attention had been called to a decision of Lord Penzance which decided clearly and distinctly that gates were illegal, and that faculties could not be granted for such a purpose. The decision was in the case of Bradford v. Fry, reported in ' Law Eeports, Probate Division,* vol. 4, p. 93. There had been a decision, and there were some words used by Dr. Lushington in the case of Westerton v. Liddell expressing disapproval of gates, but that did not impress him (the Chancellor) with the idea that there was a positive refusal, but that it was rather an expression of opinion which seemed to have reference to that particular case than that it had a general application. The Chancellor of London, Dr. Tristram, in two cases — one the case of St. Augustine's, Haggerston, and the other the case of the Church of the Annunciation, Chislehurst — decided that he was bound by the words of Dr. Lushington in Westerton v. Liddell, and that he could not grant a faculty for the erection of gates. Then there came the very recent case by Lord Penzance of Bradford v. Fry, where there had been the erection \^dthout a faculty of a screen and chancel gates, with other alterations, and the application was that they should be taken down. Upon that coming before Dr. Eoberts, the Chancellor of the Diocese of Piochester, he ordered that the whole of the articles should be taken down and removed, on the ground that they had been erected without a faculty, and that no faculty had been applied for for their confirmation. Lord Penzance was appealed to, and he decided that he could grant a confirmatory faculty for every- thing except the gates of the screen, and those he ordered to be taken down. He (the Chancellor) mentioned this in order that their attention might be drawn to it. Lord Penzance, in the judgment referred to, said, ' I do not say that the chancel screen itself in the present case has any ceremonial significance which can offend the feeling of the parishioners, but I do think that the gates attached to the screen are objectionable, for the reasons given by Dr. Lushington in Beal v. Liddell. Having regard to all these circumstances I have mentioned, I think the screen may be retained, but that the gates to it ought to be taken down.' Judgments as Chancellor xxxvii Having regard to that decision, he (Chancellor Christie) was satisfied it was not within the power of that court to grant a faculty for the purpose of erecting the gates in question. It was quite clear that that court was absolutely bound by the decision of Lord Penzance, who was not merely the Dean of Arches, but was now the Judge of the Court of Appeal at York; and his decision was therefore all the stronger. What, however, he would do was this — he would, just as they might find it convenient, grant it with the exception of the point in question, so that if they chose they could appeal, and he would grant them every facility, if they desired it, for the matter to be argued before Lord Penzance ; or he would refuse it, not on the ground that in his opinion it was inexpedient, but simply because he felt himself bound by that decree. Therefore he either adjourn the further hearing until the next court day, in order that they might have an opportunity of considering the case and of consulting with their friends or other gentlemen who were supporting the application as to whether they would like to have a faculty with- out the gates or whether they would prefer to have the faculty refused. On the other hand, he never for a moment tolerated any mere factious anti-ritualist agitation, and the display of such motive or of any personal feeling in a purely parochial matter instantly called forth strong and severe condemna- tion. In the case of the dispute in the parish of Eccles, in April 1883, as to the erection of a new reredos in place of the old one in the parish church he displayed prompt and remarkable firmness, and severely characterised the conduct of the anti-ritualists in the agitation. In the present case he was of opinion that there was nothing whatever objectionable to the most zealous opponent of what was called Eitualism. He was asked to postpone the matter in order that a further opinion of the parishioners might be obtained. From what he had been able to gather, a great deal of ill-feeling had existed in the parish, and he was quite sure that to keep the matter open any longer would be most injudicious in every respect. He hoped sincerely that those persons who opposed the application would not think that in granting the faculty, there was any desire upon the part of the court in the slightest degree to promote either ritual or ceremonies, or figures or paintings, or anything which was xxxviii Memoir in the least degree opposed to those principles of the Church of EngLand which it was the duty of that court to maintain, and which he was satisfied it was the wish of the Vicar of Eccles to maintain. In view of the whole of the circumstances, he decided that the faculty be granted as prayed. These formal ex cathedra decisions of Mr. Christie as Chancellor of the Diocese of Manchester illustrate his private and deliberately advanced opinions on points which are even now more hotly contested than in the days when the utterances were delivered. They do not, however, exhaust the tale of his contributions towards an Eirenikon between laity and clergy, between Eitualist and Protestant. His tenure of the Chancellorship was made remarkable by his addresses to the churchwardens of the diocese on the occasion of the Easter visitations or admissions, addresses which were received by the laity of the district with the completest admiration. That admiration did not find expression in ]3ublic print, but it was general from mouth to mouth, and it was accorded, too, by a people who are and have always been keener in their religious polemics than any other in England. On account of their marked influence as well as of their inherent quality it has been thought proper to include one of these addresses in the present volume.^ It is therefore unnecessary to do more in this Memoir than point out that the dominant note running through them all is conciliation as between lay and cleric, and that, by means of the explaining or the discarding of the legal fallacies involved in many of the points at issue. He never ceased to protest against the distinction and the implied antagonism of interest between rector's and people's churchwardens. Both wardens are wardens of the people or parish, and if by use and custom they have become otherwise recognised it is only by a lamentable and unjustifiable use. In place ' Mr. Christie's visitations took place normally every four years, but in 1876 and 18915 he was too ill to hold them. His four Charges were accordingly delivered in 1872, 1880, 1884, and 1889. The Charge printed in the present volume belongs to the year 1889. The Charge of 1872 I have not seen. That of the year 1880 was printed in full in the Diocesan Churchman, and again in pamphlet form by Messrs. Aikman and Woodhead of Manchester. Of the 1884 Charge lengthy reports are to be found in the local Press of May 11, 1884. Charges to Churchwardens xxxix of the former sterile distinctions and disputes he pointed out to the wardens their sole and common duty as representa- tives of the parishioners. He took the pains to go carefully through the answers given to the questions put to the wardens in the archdeacon's visitation, and found that there was a systematic disregard of the proper preservation of the parish registers and a complete absence of any idea of the importance of keeping proper terriers and inventories of church goods. So keenly did he feel the necessity of reform — he had found, for instance, that 180 parishes in the diocese had no form of terrier at all — that at considerable trouble he prepared a form of a terrier and inventory as a model or suggestion, and published it in the ' Diocesan Directory ' for 1885. On the remaining and still more vexed question of private ownership of seats in parish churches his attitude was more severely judicial. But at least in one case (that of the Longton old church dispute in June 1881) he was fearlessly outspoken in his declaration of the so-called rights of the pew-owners as illegal in their origin. Finally, as to the Ornaments Eubric, his deliberately uttered opinion, in his 1880 Charge, was as follows : — Of the many cases of complaint made to the bishops by church- wardens or parishioners, I do not recollect one in which, in the outset, legal or illegal practices have not been mixed up together and equally made matter of complaint. The placing a cross in a perfectly lawful position,^ the use of candlesticks with unlighted candles upon the Communion table, the eastward position of itself and irrespective of the question of the breaking of the bread in the sight of the people — nay, even the use of the surplice in the pulpit, and the introduction of a surpliced choir, have quite recently been treated as popish and illegal practices, and have formed the subject of complaint to the bishops. Now, I am very far from being desirous of encouraging some of these practices. Nothing can be more foolish than the intro- duction of changes in indifferent matters where such changes arc ' It is unlawful to place a cross on the Communion Table, or in such a position that to a stranger entering the church it appears to be standing on the table. xl Memoir distasteful to the church-going parishioners, or even to any con- siderable section of them. In such case it is the clear duty of the churchwardens to offer their advice, and even remonstrance against such innovations. It may be their duty (I do not say that it is not) to lay the matters before the bishop, and request his advice in reference to them. But to complain of them, to allege that they are popish practices, and to make them matters of grievance, to refuse, or encourage others in refvising, to attend the services of the Church by reason of them, has a tendency to promote an advance from these harmless and unimportant matters to actual violations of the lav^. The person complained of naturally thinks if lawful and innocent matters are made the subject of giievance and complaint, nothing further can be done if even directly illegal practices are introduced. But still further it must be remembered there are sins of omission as well as sins of commission ; practices have undoubtedly grown up in many parishes inconsistent with the rubric and with the law, and when, as frequently happens, a new incumbent intro- duces a more strict obedience to the law, the churchwardens, instead of giving him, as they are bound to do, their full support, are ready to accuse him of introducing Eitualism and Popery. There can be no rubric or any part of the law of the Church of England more clear than that which requires the use on every Sunday of the offertory sentences, and the prayer for the Church militant. Yet the introduction of these instead of meeting with general approval and support is frequently made the subject of complaint and treated as if it were a violation of the law instead of an act of obedience to it. I must again repeat that if lawless practices and disobedience are to be effectu- ally discouraged, this can be done in no way so effectually as by encouraging the strict observance of the law, not in promoting its observance only where it is agreeable to ourselves, but accepting it in its entirety, giving the fullest and most cordial support to those who endeavour to carry it out, and treating as matters of absolute indifference those things which the law wisely, or unwisely, leaves to the discretion of the minister. But if in the matter of the performance of Divine Service the law leaves a very wide discretion to the officiating minister and does not permit the interference of the churchwardens, it is other- wise as to the introduction of ornaments in the church. When once the church has been consecrated, the incumbent has no power or authority to introduce any new ornaments, however lawful, in CJiayges to CJiurchwardens xli addition to those that have been sanctioned by the act of conse- cration, or to effect any alteration in the fabric or the furniture, except under the authority of a faculty, and the churchwardens are only exercising in a proper and praiseworthy manner their rights, and protecting those of the parishioners, if they refuse to sanction any such introductions, and, should they be persisted in, if they apply to the Consistory Court for a faculty for their removal. They must not indeed, as unfortunately has been the case in one or two instances, though not, I think, in this diocese, attempt to remove the unlawful or unauthorised ornaments unless and until a faculty is obtained for the purpose, but if any such are intro- duced without a faculty they, or either of them, can at once apply to the court for their removal, when their legality, and, if legal, their expediency, can be discussed and considered, and when, if either illegal or inexpedient, an order will be made for their removal. Turning, however, from the merely parsenetic, or the exclusively legal side of these Charges — the plain indication of rights and of forgotten duty, the simple exhortation to peace — they w^ere made on more than one occasion remark- able for fearless polemic. No man was ever less of an agitator than Mr. Christie, but when called upon to speak he could speak strongly. In the visitation of May 1884, he animadverted in a very severe and hostile manner on the bill promoted by Mr. Monk, then Chancellor of Gloucester, which proposed to provide for the admission of wardens by the incumbent. Very significantly his opposition to this proposal was based upon his objection to see the power of the clergy over their wardens increased. The same Charge concluded with an even more severe and outspoken attack on the Liberation Society — an attack for which he was sharply but quite futilely taken to task in the local press.' The incident is noticeable only for the sidelight which it throws on Mr. Christie's character. His urbanity as a citizen of the world, his conciliation as a leader, his im- partiality as a judge, proverbial as they were, could not efface the strength of his convictions and the directness of his ' The animadversions of the Manchester Examiner and Times will be found in the issue of that paper for the 16th of May 1884. Mr. Christie's reply appeared in the following day's issue of the Manchester Courier. xlii Memoir utterance when once conviction was evoked and strong utterance needed, and to overlook this latter quality would be to mistake the superficial for the enduring characteristics of the man. I have preferred to illustrate Mr. Christie's work as Chancellor, and incidentally thereby his private opinions on so many hotly-contested points, from his own addresses in his visitations and his deliberately uttered decisions as judge, rather than from reference to the thorny question of the treatment of Mr. Green. In the former he was himself — a lawyer speaking law to the perception of the commonest layman, an ecclesiastical judge laying down decisions which won for him a pre-eminent place among English Diocesan Chancellors. The interest attaching to the Miles Platting case, on the other hand, is an adventitious one, and especially so as far as Mr. Christie is concerned. It was primarily simply a matter of a refractory clergyman whom the bishop was driven to coerce, and in such a case the intervention of the Chancellor was a purely professional one. He had to advise the bishop at every point as to the legal steps to be taken, and it was in such professional capacity alone that he acted. Beyond the fact that his merely official connection with these proceedings led to some misrepresentation of Mr. Christie in the London press, ^ the episode is of hardly a moment's note in his life. Whilst, however, the interest in the Miles Platting case is purely accidental, there can be little doubt that, private feelings apart, his principles as a canon lawyer led him to an unflinching support of Bishop Fraser in it. His views on the delicate question of the relation of the Church to the State in respect of ecclesiastical law were fully stated in a paper read by him in his capacity as Chancellor, at the Manchester ' The persistent attacks on Bishop Fraser for not giving notice of the voidance of St. John's, Miles Platting, and so permitting of Mr. Green's release from prison, led Mr. Christie to write a letter to the Times, which appeared in that paper on 18th of September 1882. In this letter he laid down the legal conditions governing the bishop's action. It was made the subject of a long leading article in the same paper two days later, which was followed by two other letters from him, as well as by controverting letters from Sir George Bowyer and ' Templar ' (see the Times for September 20, 23, and 30). His Views on Church and State xliii Diocesan Conference on the 16th of October 1879. This paper will be found printed in the present volume. It displays him in what is at first sight a very complex light, at once as a fearless Erastian and as a devotee of canon law. He accepted without flinching the supremacy of the State, as expressed through Parliament, in matters of ecclesiastical legislation. He accepted the Public Worship Kegulation Act, and the tribunal created by it. He accepted the Clergy Discipline Act, and, as has already been stated, he sat as one of the assessors on not less than three occasions on which Bishop Lee of Manchester tried clerical offenders. But it was as the devotee of canon law that he accepted them, and with an eclectic dissatisfaction at the judgment of the Privy Council in reference to the Ornaments Rubric, and a still stronger dissatisfaction at the formal portions of the Public "Worship Regulation Act, and at the nature of the appeal machinery and costs-making machinery contained in the Clergy Discipline Act. At the bottom, however, it is not difficult to compress this remarkable paper into a single view. It is the utterance of a man whose reverence for canon law was innate as well as bred of historical study ; of a man- whose strong sense at the same time revolted at the idea of the clergy forming an imperium in iiyiperio and questioning the powers of Parliament ; and of a man, finally, whose singular humanity fought to the last against the iniquity of costs-making, an iniquity which has turned and is turning so many of our legal remedies into deadliest poison. For the purpose of unity and completeness I have included in one view the account of Mr. Christie's Chancellor- ship. His reputation as an ecclesiastical lawyer is evidenced by the fact that in 1892 the late Bishop Durnford wished very strongly to make him Chancellor of the Diocese of Chichester, and would have prevailed upon him had it not been for Mr. Christie's illness. To return, however, to the other phases of his Manchester life. During most of the period in which he occupied the dignity of Chancellor of the diocese he was also an active civil magistrate. Having practically retired from the Bar in 1876 he was, at the pressuig instance of the Chairman of the xliv Memoir Salford Hundred Quarter Sessions, appointed a Justice of the Peace for the county of Lancaster in October 1878. Ahnost immediately thereupon he began to sit in the Second Court, and in the absence of Mr. W. H. Higgin, Q.C., he frequently took his place as Chairman in the First Court of the Salford Hundred Sessions. His demeanour on the bench was characterised by keen legal acumen of the highest order, but more still by a humaneness which, by contrast, on more than one occasion deeply moved his auditors. One instance is still brought home to me with singular force. On the only day in his life on which my own father was called to perform the irksome duty of a juror he witnessed in the Salford Hundred Court what was to him a most disagreeable display of brow-beating illtemper on the part of the then presiding magistrate. After an interval this nameless magistrate descended, and his place was taken by another. An instant change came over the court, as if the atmosphere had cleared. Calmly, keenly, but quietly, the magistrate heard the case, listening to the prisoner — a poor old man — so gently, so humanely. And when he sentenced him it was still with the same humaneness and subdued feeling. ' Now treat the old man gently,' he said, as they took him away. ' Who is the magistrate ? ' asked my father of his neighbour juror. ' That,' was the reply, ' is Chancellor Christie.' Let it not be supposed for a moment that such demeanour was the outcome of a cultivated and professional urbanity. It was not. It was the intense humanity of the man break- ing through even the legal acumen of the lawyer and the professional attitude of the judge. And the impression which his demeanour produced upon the jurors on that occasion was not confined to him who told me the story. Incidents such as this would be trivial in any man's life but for their serving, as they do, for a corrective against a wrong impression. From the numerous (invariably sympa- thetic) Press references which appeared after Mr. Christie's death one would naturally suppose that he was first and last and always a bibliophile. So he was — but a bibliophile with a fund and depth of humanity that was hardly suspected by the outer world, and hardly suspected simply because of his A Benefacto)' of Owens xlv own fastidiousness and his habitual and intense dislike of any display of feeling. Besides being a magistrate for the County of Lancaster, he was also a Justice of the Peace for the county of Derby, having been nominated by the Duke of Devonshire after his removal to Darley Dale. He accordingly sat regularly at the Matlock Petty Sessions for some years. During this period he also filled the office of chairman of the North Darley Local Board. On the 1st of December 1893, Mr. Christie resigned the Chancellorship of the Diocese of Manchester in consequence of now seriously failing health. From that date his active official connection with Manchester practically ended, for he had some time before also ceased to sit as a civil magistrate. But his personal connection with the city of his adoption was never broken till his death. After his resignation in 1869 of his Professorship of Law at Owens College he remained one of the most active and influential of the governors till his death, and also (from 1870 to 1886) a member of the Council of the College. He was an original member, and one of the most energetic, of the Extension Committee appointed in 1867 to provide the college with a new building, and to enlarge its scope. He took part in the scheme for incorporating with the college the Royal Manchester School of Medicine, for the erection of the new Medical School in 1874, and of the Museum in 1879, and became finally one of the most active promoters of the founding of the Victoria University. From the inception of the University he was a member of both its Court and Council (1880-96) ; and in 1895 received from it the highest honour it could confer in the degree of LL.D. It would be difficult to express what the College owes to him for his guiding hand during all these years of growth. For the extension movement and the university movement had not been carried through without difficulty and opposi- tion. Some of the original trustees of the College were conservative and timid, and more than once the negotiations with them (for instance, over the question of the erection of a women's college, and of the equal admission of women to xlvi Memoir classes and degrees) would have been wrecked but for his tact and influence. But Mr. Christie did not rest content with the exercise of mere guidance and influence. He long meditated some form of useful gift to the College, and as with the lapse of time his means permitted, the wish took gradually the definite shape of building a library, with the ultimate intention also of presenting to it his own unique collec- tion of books. His offer was made to the College in the autumn of 1893, and at once warmly accepted. The building was designed by Mr. Alfred Waterhouse, the archi- tect of the college buildings. Mr. Waterhouse was given a perfectly free hand in the design, with the object of making the new library conform with the then future intention of completing the college quadrangle. The building was com- plete five years later, and was formally opened by the Duke of Devonshire on the 22nd of June 1898. By the time of its completion, Mr. Christie had already grown too weak to bear a journey to Manchester. Accordingly he himself never saw the finished building, and was absent from the opening ceremony. He therefore deputed his colleague. Dr. Ward, now Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge, to represent him on the occasion. In the letter from him which Dr. Ward read at the ceremony, Mr. Christie made the following reference to what he described as the carrying out of a wish and in- tention of nearly thirty years' standing. When the present college buildings were first planned it was out of my power to incur the expense of erecting a library, but I then determined that, in the event of no suitable library being built in my lifetime, I would, if possible, provide by will for the erection of such a building. As time went on, it seemed not impossible for me to carry out my wishes in my lifetime, and learning from you and others how utterly inadequate the accom- modation for the books was, and how seriously this interfered with their use and with the convenience of the professors and students, I decided on offering to build a library forthwith. This offer was made and accepted in the autumn of 1893, and I have now the satisfaction of knowing that a building has been provided, adequate not only for the accommodation of the collection of books at present owned by the college, but also for the probable '2i/alK*^^Sa