to promote the return of members of known anti-scriptural sentiments, in opposition to others of religious character and consistent Christian life. We might mention many other things; but we forbear. It may be necessary for us to revert to the topic; and if we do so, we shall not shrink from going into it fully and fairly; but we are unwilling to provoke irritation without extreme necessity, more especially as many of the most pious and sound-minded men among the religious Dissenters mourn over these things not less than ourselves. Most heartily can we use, from our inmost soul, the prayer which was appropriately introduced by the rulers of our Church into one of the Fast-Day Services in the beginning of the late war (we do not recollect whether it was a new prayer, or how often it was used); "Give us all grace, to put away from us all religious dissension; that they who agree in the essentials of our most holy faith, and look for pardon through the merits and intercession of the Saviour, may, notwithstanding the differences upon points of doubtful opinion, and in the forms of external worship, still be united in the bonds of Christian charity, and fulfil thy blessed Son's commandment, of loving one another as He hath loved them."

Our Dissenting friends may remind us that there are, or have been, churchmen who would not use this prayer; as was the case with the late Dr. Daubeny, and the present rector of Mary-le-bone, who preferred violating their ecclesiastical obedience to reading it; because it recognized some persons as holding the essentials of our most holy faith, who do not agree with us in external worship. We know, and lament, that such a spirit has been displayed, and that Dissenters have made it recoil upon our Church, which is the farthest possible from being an intolerant church. But while the welldisposed members of the Church of England have been increasingly anxious to regard in a Christian spirit" all who agree in the essentials of our most holy faith, and look for pardon through the merits and mediation of the Saviour;" some of the Dissenting ministers of the present day adopt a style of exclusionism whichto say nothing of its violating truthdoes no honour to their candour. There happen to lie on our table a number of The Times newspaper, which announces that the Bishop of London has been preaching a charity sermon at Hounslow, and a pamphlet entitled "The Sacred Trust; a Charge delivered at the Ordination of the Rev. T. Atkinson over the Church assembling at Hounslow, by Andrew Reed." Now, what a miserable, narrow-minded exclusionism is this; "THE church assembling at Hounslow!" Thus the Episcopal church

So much for the negative side: but, though we deprecate subversion, we implore amendment; and accordingly, in several of our Numbers, and especially the last, we have suggested several heads of reform, which it appeared to us very desirable to embody in petitions to Parliament; but, considering the great importance of the subject, we think it will be useful to expand those heads in a more distinct manner, as follows. We will suppose them embodied in a petition to the following effect.

"Your Petitioners presume humbly to suggest a few particulars in which amendment appears to them both needful and attainable.

"1. In the first place, they cannot but lament the want of specific professional and religious education, and due probation, for candidates for Holy Orders; which they believe might be provided for, as is done in all other Protestant Churches, either by means of theological seminaries, or by some arrangement with the Univer sities.

"2. With a view to check the entrance into Holy Orders of persons not heartily disposed to the duties of the sacred office, your Petitioners pray for a diminution of the temptations to assume that function merely as a temporal provision and an easy profession; it being manifest, that in proportion as good discipline is kept upas pluralities, sinecures, and inordinate emoluments are curtailed-and as the Clergy are expected to reside in their parishes, and to attend diligently to pastoral duties-persons who are not conscientiously devoted to such employments will be less inclined to enter the Church than under a more lax system.

"3. Your Petitioners think it indispensable to the purity and spiritual efficiency of the Church, that the holding of two be

at that place is no church; the Bishop of London and Dr. Benson are mere pretenders; while Bishop Reed and the Rev. Mr. Atkinson are "THE church," the true church, the only church in the place. We the more readily notice this exclusionism in connexion with this particular sermon or "Charge," because there is nothing in the discourse itself to offend any Christian mind quite the contrary: it is wholly free from controversy: it does not touch upou the matter of Dissent; and it is so full of excellent and scriptural instruction, that even the no-bishop of London might have preached it before the no-church of the Episcopalians with great edification to all parties. Would that we could add as much of some twenty recent Dissenting publications which we might advert to, in proof of all, and more than all, we have said of the bad spirit which is afloat among a portion, at least, of the Dissenting body.

nefices having cure of souls should be wholly prohibited.

"4. Your Petitioners further entreat, that every Clergyman may be obliged to reside upon his benefice, having cure of souls and as many such benefices are too poorly endowed to afford a suitable maintenance, they pray that they may be augmented.

5. Your Petitioners respectfully urge, that large and populous parishes should be divided or subdivided into convenient pastoral districts; and that adequate facilities should be given to the building and opening of new churches or chapels, wherever necessary; for though much has been effected of late years for this end, more is requisite, especially as regards the wants of the very poor. They would suggest, that, wherever there is a population needing church room, any suitable buildings may be permitted to be fitted up and opened for Divine Worship, with no other formality than the licence of the Bishop.

6. Your Petitioners pray for the speedy commutation of Tithes for land, corn-rent, or some other source of equally permanent and fairly adjusted income, if such can be discovered; being persuaded, that, without this essential measure, the Clergy and their Parishioners cannot be expected to live on those terms of harmony which are requisite for pastoral usefulness and the promotion of the purposes of a Church Establishment.

7. Your Petitioners respectfully suggest the necessity of a better distribution both of the labours and the resources of the Bishops, as requisite for effectual episcopal supervision, and to diminish the evil of translations. If it should be found that any of the sees are too large to allow of adequate episcopal superintendence, they would submit the propriety of dividing them; and also that the Bishops should be relieved, where the public service will allow of it, of some of the extra-professional burdens which at present press upon them; so as to enable them to cultivate a more intimate acquaintance with their Clergy, and to devote themselves with less distraction to the care of their dioceses.

"8. Your Petitioners submit, that the laws and usages of ecclesiastical patronage require considerable modifications, so as to subject the parties presenting to greater responsibility than at present. They would allow the parishioners ready means of appeal, upon any charge of unsound doctrine or unbecoming life, to be decided openly and solemnly by the Bishop upon the merits of the case.

"9. In regard to the Crown and Episcopal patronage, which your Petitioners view as held for public, and not private or political, objects, they submit that a plan should be devised for so disposing of it as to give to the whole body of the Clergy, under due regulations, and having respect CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 374.

to character and attainments, a fair prospect of arriving in succession at a benefice whereby there would be afforded to pious and industrious curates, or incumbents with small benefices, that reasonable hope of eventually bettering their temporal condition which is held forth to all other public functionaries.

"10. Your Petitioners desire to see a salutary system of ecclesiastical discipline, befitting modern usages and feelings, in place of the cumbrous and expensive forms of the ecclesiastical courts, useless churchwardens' presentments, and other obsolete and unheeded checks. They are anxious for a more effectual supervision of the Clergy, and for facilities for the prompt removal of all gross scandals from the Church.

11. Your Petitioners pray, that, in any large measure of Church Reform, a plan may be devised for extending the ordinances of National Religion to every spot where the British flag is unfurled; that our countrymen, wherever their lot is cast, may find themselves not expatriated from the ministrations of the Christian faith as enjoyed in their native land."

These heads appear to us to comprise the chief matters of effectual church reform; we mean in reference to external arrangements, for we have not included the often proposed amendments of the liturgy, for the reasons assigned in our former volumes. Our opinion on this matter cannot be better expressed than in the words of the preface to the Prayer-book itself, to which we refer our readers. If we could hope for a revision of our church formularies, for such reasons as are there specified, and in the spirit there recommended, we should heartily rejoice in the measure; for what human work is faultless? but at present we cannot but entertain considerable fears as to the result of such an experiment; unless the proposed amendments could be confined to a very few particulars which a large number of persons of true piety and friendly to the Church of England would wish to see modified.

The chief reason which has led us for so many years, and especially of late, to write so much upon church reform, where. ever reform may be required, is, that it is right in itself; but we might add, as a secondary reason, that it is the best practical answer to Dissenters. Robert Hall remarked, as long ago as 1818: "The old grounds of dissent are the true ones; our recent apologists have mixed up too much of a political cast in their reasonings upon this subject. Though I should deprecate the founding of any established church, in the popular sense of that term, I think it very injudicious to lay that as the corner-stone of dissent. have much stronger ground in the specific corruptions of the Church of England; ground which our pious ancestors occu

R

We

pied, and which may safely defy every attempt of the most powerful and acute minds to subvert." It appears then, that in the opinion of this highly-gifted and enlightened Dissenter, if the church were divested of "specific corruptions," the strongest ground for dissent would be lost. Let churchmen learn a lesson from this admission, and cleanse their communion from every 66 corruption." Dissenters have learned a lesson from it; namely, to fall back upon the "political argument, so that if the church were ever so pure, many of them would now still object that it is a national establishment, and therefore unlawful. But if the church prove true to itself, and to the public, and become as thoroughly rooted as it ought to be in the affections of the people, we entertain no great alarm from arguments of this speculative and "political cast.' A national religious establishment is not only an institution so scriptural, but so congenial to the wants and feelings of the people of a Christian land, that, provided it rises to the measure of its high duties, it will be acceptable to the public in spite of all that either dissent or infidelity can urge on speculative grounds against it. Masses of men seldom speculate discontentedly when they are practically satisfied.

From England we pass over to Ireland, where church subversion appears more probable than church reform; and seriously as we think of the forthcoming session, in regard to our own branch of the United Church, we think far more seriously in regard to its more immediately exposed offset in Ireland. In our observations respecting the former, we said that there are two points for the friends of the church to keep in mind; namely, reform and conservation: but in Ireland there is a third; namely, the great ques tion between Protestantism and Popery. In England, if our legislators shall duly feel the importance of a national church, and the need of reforming and not destroying our own, all will yet be well; but in regard to Ireland, there is likely to arise the question of providing for the Roman-Catholic Clergy, and devoting to this object a part at least of the funds which belong to the Protestant Episcopal Church We shall rejoice if no such measure is proposed; but if it be, it ought to be met by the most strenuous resistance upon the part of Protestant England. We think nothing comparatively of the temporal emoluments of the church; we could submit to much injustice and spoliation, if that should be the particular trial which God should permit his church to undergo for its purification; but to countenance the corruptions of Popery, by providing for its ministers from the public purse, would be a national sin, of which we trust this Pretestant country will never be guilty. And

yet this begins to be familiarly talked of in some of our political circles, as "the only paracea for the troubles of Ireland." When we contemplate the convulsed state of that portion of the empire, and the assassinations and massacres which are becoming so trite as to pass unnoticed as ordinary occurences, as if the murder of a Protestant Clergyman were a meritorious act of patriotism and religion, we feel willing to give a great price for peace; but there is one price we may not giveand that is conscience; and the conscience of a true Protestant cannot admit any compromise with Popery. It may yield equal political rights, but to support an idolatrous altar were an offence against God. What measures are to be pursued in regard to the Protestant Church of Ireland, we, of course, know not; but should a national endowment of Popery be proposed, the religious part of the community of all creeds may and will make a determined stand. It were better far that the ecclesiastical revenues of Ireland should be at once transferred to the tax office, than that Protestant England should nationalize the corruptions of the Church of Rome. The first would be simple robbery; the second would involve the additional guilt of applying the spoil to unlawful purposes.

With regard to the clergy of Ireland, they cannot well be worse off than they are at present, and one of the first duties of the new parliament ought to be to devise prompt and adequate measures for their relief. Our readers will perceive by a paper under our cover, that their case has become so urgent, that a public subscription has been judged requisite for their immediate assistance. The Archbishop of Armagh's statement in that paper will shew the character and vast extent of the distress; its severity may be judged of by the following brief extracts from a mass of private letters which abound in similar details. We pledge ourselves that the passages are authentic, and that the writers are persons of the highest respectability.

1. "Mr.

assured me that he had

just left a Clergyman in his neighbourhood so reduced as only to be able to give bread to his wife alone, who was in delicate health, and he (the father), and the rest of the family, were living on potatoes and water. I heard of several others not much better off; some having no firing for the winter but what they themselves gathered: and their delicacy in complaining or applying for assistance renders such facts as these little known.

2. "The state of the Clergy in this diocese is deplorable......... Poor and, and ——, and

&c. are in

and

A

of their hospitality. This, how ever, cannot last long."

3. The deprivation at this moment, where the income of the Clergy depends. exclusively upon Tithe, is very universal; and there is not one Clergyman in Ireland, I believe, who does not more or less suffer."

4. "A friend of mine yesterday informed me of a Clergyman's daughter whose father and family were reduced to such distress that she absolutely offered herself as a maid-servant to a lady of my acquaintance.”

5. "Many of the Clergy are in actual want; glad to obtain potatoes and milk for their families."

It would be unnecessary to add a single word to urge this affecting appeal; it must and it will be met by the warmest Christian sympathy, and by such a measure of pecuniary aid as will greatly relieve the present distress, and prevent much actual suffering till government and parliament can take up the matter, which they are bound to do, and we trust will do, and prosecute it with firmness to a just and wise termination. It cannot be that the affairs of Ireland either in church or state can be allowed to remain for many weeks in their present condition. Even the sternness of martial law were more just and pacific than the reign of terrorism; but we believe even yet, that Ireland may be tranquillized without any expedient of repulsive severity, if only Great Britain will do its duty, and throw in its moral weight, to adjust the balance. There is one hope which we fondly cherish as arising out of the agitations of both islands, namely, that right-minded, patriotie, and Christian men of whatever party will forget their private animosities for the public good, and unite in a powerful phalanx against the common disturbers of the national repose; the common architects of national ruin, whether in England or Ireland. This we are persuaded might be done without any unworthy compromise; and the union would be a bright omen for the national welfare.

compass of legislation, nor can kings or parliaments control it, except to augment the evil by injudicious interference. They assume that by the introduction of poor laws into Ireland, the condition of the poor would be bettered; whereas it is demonstrable that, bad as it is, it would be deteriorated. Suppose that on board a vessel, on short allowance in the Atlantic, some passenger under the notion of humanity were to get a resolution passed that every person had a right to a full diet; would this really be wise or humane? No, it is replied, because they could not get more provisions, and must soon starve if they consumed all that they have at once. And how does this differ from the case of a nation, unless indeed as a freetrade importation of corn from abroad, might in part destroy the parallel? Some persons speak as if setting men to work of necessity made more food; and as if it were the want of industry that is the chief bane of the poor. No statement can be more incorrect; there are of course idle profligates in every country, but the poor generally speaking in England, Ireland, and Scotland, are willing ― nay, anxious— to work, and often even beyond their strength, if they can obtain comfortable food, clothing, and lodging, in return for their exertions. If by any process we could make every person in the three kingdoms do twice as much work next year as he did this, (and no more corn were brought to market from abroad,) no person would be better off as regards food, with the exception of a temporary fragment wrung from the soil by a new stimulus, but which cannot continue to advance, and is at best scarcely worth naming. The only result would be, that with exhausted health, a man would work twice as many hours for a loaf next year as he did this; but there would not be It is a strange one pauper the less. fancy that labour is of necessity bread. Would it be so in the aforesaid ship? Would double hours of toil produce a single biscuit? The poor can but eat what is grown, and we might as well affirm that every man has a right to venison and claret, as that a nation is bound to see that every person is maintained. It is not bound to do so, because it cannot do

so.

God's word; but speaking in a mere economical manner, as many persons are benefited by the expenditure of the 12,000, in the ordinary modes of life, as if one thousand of it had been given in poor's rates. If this hard-hearted man

whose crime will be his punishment were forced to give one thousand pounds to the poor rates, he would have but eleven thousand left, so that he must curtail his expenses by one twelfth, that is, in other words,dismiss one twelfth; of the labourers he now directly or indirectly employs; and this twelfth must go for work to the overseer of the parish, instead of being supported in honest independence. But is this just or desirable? Is it humane or Christian? Set a million of paupers of unemployed persons, next year, in Ireland to work, and give them food for their labour: what have you done? You have taken just that quantity of food and work out of the market; so that another million who were living by their industry will now be reduced to pauperism: or, to speak more correctly, the operation will be divided among the whole population, so that not one million only, but many, will suffer by short allowance; just as the whole crew of the supposed ship would, if the captain gave an extra biscuit to one part of them, while no new supply could be procured. The duty of individual charity is quite another matter. Captain Bligh humanely gave a fainting sailor a little of the slender stock of wine in his boat; and humanity is justice: but he did not lay down a law that every man had a right to a full glass, when to give one was impossible. A rich man does not personally eat or drink all his money he employs it, or lends it upon interest for others to employ and if any be taken away for poor's rates, there is so much the less for other purposes; so that not more, nor in truth so much, work is given to the poor by poor laws, as by leaving each person to spend his income in his own way. The claims on every one to devote as large a portion of his substance as he can to charity, rest upon other grounds. The portion given in voluntary charity does not, any more than that given in poor's rates, produce a larger accession of work or food to the poor generally than if the same sum had been expended in goods or wages, or even in mere luxuries; but it assists some particular poor man, whose wants are personally known to the individual, and whom he is peculiarly bound to relieve. The donor subtracts something that would have gone to employ and feed workmen, servants, or others in the ordinary course of life, in order to relieve a miserable object whom he is specially acquainted with. And this is a duty, and a public benefit: and not to do so would be selfish, hardhearted, and unchristian. But laws and lawgivers can only view mankind in masses, and consult for the general welfare upon large principles of wisdom and justice. Individuals ought to make personal sacrifices, to assist the poor; but when this is attempted to be done by parliamentary enactments the order of

Divine Providence is inverted, and evil invariably ensues. To benefit Ireland, we must educate, civilize, and Christianize the rude masses of its inhabitants, and open channels to their industry ; but forcibly to take a part of one man's bread to give to another, so far from benefiting the people, will only add to their improvidence, immorality, and wretchedness.

Another important and pressing question for legislative consideration, (still confining ourselves to questions directly involving matters of religious duty,) is the best means of terminating West-Indian Slavery. Its extinction is a matter settled and irrevocable; and no man who consults either private conscience or public opinion will venture to re-open this part of the question, the only point that remains for the legislature to decide upon is the best practicable means of arranging the detail of emancipation in a spirit of justice and mercy, both to the master and the slave. The evidence before the House of Commons' Committee of last session has fully established the two following points: first "that the slaves, if emancipated, would maintain themselves, would be industrious, and disposed to acquire property by labour;" and secondly, "that the dangers of emancipation are greater from freedom withheld than from freedom granted." An elaborate and most valuable analysis of this evidence has been published by the Anti-slavery Society. The evidence before the House of Lords' Committee has also been ably and acutely analysed by a writer under the name of Legion, in a letter to the Duke of Richmond, the chairman of the committee; and though the writer's style is not to our taste, yet the matter which he details is of great value. The proposers of that committee little foresaw what an exposition they should be compelled to make of the atrocious system which they had hoped to whitewash and decorate in holiday colours. Of evidence we have now a superfluity: there remains, therefore, but one duty to strike off the fetter in the safest and speediest manner possible. But this last effort will yet require a giant arm; for the hydra of slavery has never yielded without a powerful struggle: and so far from thinking that the friends of the slave ought to sleep at their posts, we would alarm them to new and unwonted energy; more especially in urging upon the parliamentary representatives in their respective vicinities the duty of zealously aiding this great work of Christian justice and mercy. The Society of Friends are, as usual, active in the cause; and they have just issued a most impressive, affecting, and scriptural Appeal to their fellow-Christians in its behalf. The Evangelical Dissenters, in the solemn services of the day which they lately set apart for prayer and thanksgiving to God on account of the abundant harvest, and