all sorts of creeds to be taught in its bosom, and all kinds of caprices to be enacted in its temples ?*

To these remarks on the books on Church Reform, it must be added, that it seems quite clear, from the best information, that a Commutation Bill is to be brought in, and it is earnestly to be hoped that, if so, as many secure forms of investment as can be devised, will be permitted. So alone can any safety or any feasibility be given to the measure. Nor can it be much doubted that other measures (i. e. as to the distribution of church property) are also in preparation.† But we have assurances from the Chancellor and Mr. Stanley, (the Bishop of Lichfield adds in his Charge, and from Earl Grey,) that they think church property inalienable. And when three men of as powerful minds as these begin practically to handle the questions of pluralities and non-residence, and the inequalities of church preferment, it is not possible that the truth can escape them, that much which looks well on paper cannot be done except at the expence of greater evils, or of injustice. Within these boundaries, who objects to church reform?

Such being the state of things, such hosts of agitators handling this great subject, and government very clearly handling it too, let churchmen remember that the church means the laity as well as the

This article was, as before stated, written a month ago, but the writer feels no desire to recall, and no wish to change, any thing which he has said. Nor does he, on farther consideration, feel at all disposed to go any farther into controversy with Dr. Arnold, for the simple reason that they have no common ground to meet upon. The proposals made by Dr. Arnold have (according to the newspapers) been echoed in another place, and unquestionably in a very different spirit, by one of the metropolitan members, Mr. Tennyson. This gentleman is made to declare in one sentence, that he is a friend to the established church, and in the next, that its articles contain a mass of contradictions which are a terrible burthen to the consciences of the clergy, and which ought consequently to be entirely altered! Some persons may be inclined to be angry with Mr. Tennyson; but (even if he did say all this) to be angry with a man for asserting falsehoods out of sheer ignorance, or to think a second time of the opinion on religious matters of a person who professes himself a friend to a church which contains a mass of contradictions in its articles, would be really absurd. Some persons again may be very angry with a gentleman for talking so quietly of altering the articles, and taking it for granted that the clergy would assent to such alteration; but this anger would be more unjust and absurd than the other. After Mr. Tennyson has so clearly stated (according to the newspapers) that he is a friend to the established church, though it contains a mass of contradictions, the whole matter is quite clear, and Mr. Tennyson, instead of meaning to insult the clergy, obviously means to compliment them by supposing, that if the articles were altered as he recommends, it would make no difference to them. Mr. Tennyson is clearly, in short, an utilitarian of the first water, and he likes an established church because, on the whole, it tends to keep things quiet, and then arts and sciences can flourish, and money can be made. It is in his view obviously a man's sacred duty to promote this wellbeing of society. Now, if the first article of the new church, instead of saying that there is only one God, as the present first article does, made a small change, and said that there was no God at all, and if that little change would conciliate a large majority of mankind to the church (and perhaps ere long it might) and thus promote peace, and allow mammon to prosper, would Mr. Tennyson mean to insult the clergy if he said that they would assent to this little change? On the contrary, he would only mean that they acted like men of sense, and that this was their bounden duty. Other people may, no doubt, see the thing differently from Mr. Tennyson; but it is only just to explain how he seems to view it.

These anticipations are, it seems, or are to be realized.

clergy, and that all true members of the church are bound, in such times and circumstances as these, to consider themselves as called on for greater exertions in order to make the union amongst themselves closer and more effective, and thus to prepare for any trials or afflictions with which it may please God to try the church. That this end must be aimed at, every true Christian will agree. The choice of means is one which requires the greatest wisdom; but it must soon be made.

P. S. Since last month there has been another swarm of "church reformers" on the wing. It is almost amusing to trace the progress of one's own feelings about them. First comes exceeding anger, at the mischief done by an unguarded statement or partial view of supposed evils, which rises into positive indignation at finding such statements and views repeated on four or five sides, and by persons from whom one would have expected better. Then comes wonder at the cloud of "meddlers" which come across and obscure the sunshine. Then something very like laughter, at the strange and odd fancies which they send forth, and the perfect confidence with which each vends his nostrum, and fancies that his plan is " as easy as lying." Laughter is very soon succeeded by indifference-for one cannot laugh long at utter folly-and then weariness follows. Positive nausea seems likely to succeed, as far as one can judge. The writer can answer for the regular progress of the symptoms up to excessive weariness. Mr. Gleig mentions that he has twenty-three pamphlets on church reform lying on his library table. A pleasant repast, but requiring a strong digestion! There have been some little doings on the conservative side too.

A late "Fellow of Balliol" has published " Suggestions relating to the Professional Education of the Clergy," which he makes out to be worse than it really is, and then goes on to lay down his scheme for forming cathedrals into colleges. Persons going into orders are not to be compelled to stay to take a degree (or some new degree, after a short residence, is to be invented for them); and then it would be "a mighty improvement" to have specific duties attached to every stall, "to say nothing of having, at every cathedral, a body of theologians, ready to afford to the bishop any necessary assistance, information, (poor bishop!) or advice. The dean is to teach the evidences, pastoral theology, including preaching, visiting of the sick, conduct of schools, and charitable institutions, management of controversy with infidels, heretics, Romanists, schismatics, (poor dean!) &c. &c. &c. The archdeacon is to lecture on the liturgy, articles, canons, homilies, and ecclesiastical law. Then there are to be professors of Hebrew, Greek, and ecclesiastical history.

Archdeacon Butler has written a pamphlet in favour of dignitaries, lamenting at the same time that they have not spoken for themselves. There are some excellent observations in his pamphlet, and he advocates the cause of the dignitaries and of cathedrals with cleverness and success.*

*He gives a list of names of present dignitaries known by their writings. Do Hall and Herne among the prebendaries of St. Paul's mean Hale and Horne?

Then "A Beneficed Clergyman" has written a very decent pamphlet, called "What will the Bishops do?" This gentleman's elevated views and principles are at once explained by his defence of the bishops for voting against the Reform Bill. He thinks it hard to abuse them for this, because they were made bishops by Tory patrons, and it would not have been decent or decorous in them to have flown in the face of their patrons. "They were in a dilemma of no ordinary difficulty, and although they may be thought to have adopted the less expedient alternative, yet surely, in the presence, and with the example and urgent solicitation of those who had advanced them to their legislative functions, it would have been no light matter, neither, in the ordinary estimate of these questions, would it have been thought very honest and honourable, to have voted in direct opposition to their patrons." This excellent gentleman seems quite to forget that it is just possible that these bishops might have a troublesome article called a conscience, and that there are some instances (though he will be surprised at hearing it) of men's voting according to their conscience, not thinking of his god, expediency, and remembering that they are in another presence besides the presence of their patrons. One is very thankful at finding such a sentence early in a book; it saves all doubt as to whether one shall go on. The still earlier part of the book has a compassionate feeling for "the melancholy inadequacy of his Grace's (the primate's) conceptions of what the times require," and the ten-thousand-times-repeated history of church corruptions, commendams, &c. &c. How well does one know before each sentence exactly what it will contain! Yet this gentleman is not for destroying the church: quite the contrary-he is a conservative, and prophesies all sorts of evil to the laymen if they touch church property. It is only necessary to add, that the answer one would give to "What will the bishops do?" would be, that if they could and would rid the church of persons who have no better principles than "A Beneficed Clergyman," they would confer a great favour on all decent people.

Mr. Uvedale Price has written a book, called "Reform without Reconstruction." The Liturgy, he thinks, is too long-a fresh selection of proper lessons is wanted-the Apostles' Creed ought to be left out, as the Nicene is used-the Ten Commandments are 66 a singular and most uncalled for interpolation" into a Christian Liturgy. (This is followed by other of Archbishop Whately's opinions, as lately expressed by him, as to the doctrine of providential interference, and the Sabbath.) Moral directions from the New Testament ought to be substituted for the Decalogue-and various minor changes on fastdays, &c. Mr. Price suggests the giving certain stalls to the poor bishopricks, instead of livings, an arrangement which many have thought desirable. He says, with great truth, that the only real remedy for the small livings is, a sacrifice on the part of the patrons. But alas! will it be made?

"L. L. B." writes a book to shew that curates must be paid much more highly than the act requires, because they cannot have the influence on the poor or rich which they ought without money, and their preaching will not be so much attended to. His last fact being

quite false, and his neglecting to remember (1) that, as far at least as the rich go, no difference arises, because from a curate and young man so much is not expected as from an older and beneficed one, and (2) that as to the poor, there are non-resident rectors, who do not, though non-residents, forget the poor, are matters which do not particularly recommend him to notice. His statement, too, that the curates have long been obliged to "submit to severe and oppressive terms," and that "the present system for the purpose of enriching a part of the rising generation, subjects them to much inconvenience and mortification," shews his temper quite sufficiently. As to the large body of 4000 or 5000 curates of which he talks, who are to have a just remuneration, would he be so good as to find out first, where, in 4000 or 5000 livings, the money is to come from which is to place them in a situation, as he desires, to command the respect of the rich by their expenditure, and the love of the poor by their charities? Not from the incumbents, inasmuch as they have no such incomes themselves.

Mr. Cator, of Carshalton, has published a pamphlet, full of valuable remarks and sound principles, called "The Writing of a Man's Hand," which should be read by those who are so extremely anxious for the disunion of church and state. He mentions a curious fact, that a person high in power expressed his approbation of a sermon, preached in a dissenting meeting-house, full of political discussions as to the Reform Bill, and most violent abuse of the church and the bishops. If a clergyman preached a political sermon, full of abuse of dissenting ministers, what would be said?

There is a little pamphlet called " Plain Words addressed to Members of the Church of England," by "one of themselves," which puts all the plain and strong arguments for the church in a remarkably clear and pointed way.

And, finally, Mr. Palmer has published "Remarks on Dr. Arnold," which, it is to be hoped, will be in every body's hands. In saying that it is Mr. Palmer's, one says at once that it is written on the highest principle, that it is fearless and powerful. And these are the things which we want now.

MISCELLANEA.

THE FACTORIES.

THE manufacturers of England have sent forth a very strong and touching address, stating the dreadful sufferings to which their children are exposed, and calling on their countrymen to assist them in rescuing these poor victims from the iron grasp of Mammon. To the clergy they have addrest themselves especially; and such an address ought not to be made in vain, if they whom it calls to action have any power of acting to good purpose. Of one thing they who make the call may

be assured, that their unfortunate children have the fullest sympathy of every Christian heart; and that every Christian minister, especially, must feel it to be his bounden duty to lift up his voice against the monstrous wickedness which is perpetrated yearly, daily, and hourly, in this country, by men who call themselves Christians. We have all of

us heard we are doomed every day to hear-the ten-times-repeated tale of the wickedness, the oppression, and the cruelty of priests and kings. But what priest of Moloch, what despot did the world ever yet see, whose cruelties were at all equal to those practised by the priests of Mammon in English factories? The bloodiest tyrant that ever scourged the earth still held only a power which, "after it had killed the body, had no more that it could do." The factories of England have a far more deadly and destructive power than this. Whatever human power can do to torture, and injure, and enfeeble the bodily frame, they can do. They can, and they do, rob youth of its joy, and manhood of its health and vigour. Where they are, no smile plays, and no blush mantles on the cheek of childhood. Before childhood has risen to youth, their accursed power has introduced feebleness, infirmity, disease, and distortion into the frame; and before the "heavy hours" of youth "are past," the victim, if he is miserable enough to survive, is a confirmed wretch for life.

But yet this is little, or rather nothing. Over a body distorted by disease, or disabled by infirmity, the mind may reign triumphant, and may shew of how little importance to man, even here below, is the well or ill being of his bodily frame. In the distorted and disabled body, every holy affection may dwell, as in its proper temple; every Christian grace may shine triumphant, and wishes, thoughts, and counsels for the good of others, may flow from this well of good in glad profusion. But these pure springs of spiritual and intellectual life are poisoned by the dreadful spirit of the factory. Here is its most awful power; that in which it exceeds the power of every human despot. It has " more that it can do;" for after it has killed the body, it has power to cast both body and soul into hell. Man was formed for solitude as well as for society. It is not good for him to be alone, but it is assuredly not good for him to be never alone. And if there were nothing besides to object to the factories, this alone would make them a curse to society, that they make their victims always dwell in the crowd and hum of men, and never leave them to gather that good which God has decreed shall be gathered, by even lowly-endowed natures, from solitude, and from that quiet communion with him and with his works, which solitude affords. But this is not the only good of which the factory deprives these miserable children. Are they taught, or can they be taught, labour-worn as they are, and chained down by their taskmasters for a period during which, before experience and proof of what Mammon dictates, it would have been impossible to believe that men could have doomed the helpless years of childhood to labour,-can they be taught any thing beyond the mechanic and manual labour to which their lives are to be devoted? Can they find a single hour in which there can be imprest on their young hearts the knowledge and love of that Heavenly Master, who, unlike their masters, desires to see all his