be softened and broken down by an easy and luxuriant life; and that when wallowing in all the comforts of a glebe establishment, in the receipt of a pension of £500 per annum, with the golden link of mutual confidence, now existing between the people and themselves, almost severed, it is not too much to say that some of them, at least, would become the avowed minions of that Government rather than throw themselves again upon the liberality of their disaffected and disgusted flocks. I fear there are some to whom this language will not be pleasing. Yet I will not be deterred from speaking out boldly, because I am convinced that I am telling the truth, and that the magnitude of the crisis calls upon it."

Concurring in much of what is here advanced, it is more a matter of principle than of expediency with us when we protest against the Government's offer to endow Popery. If God have determined that the scheme shall be carried out, we have little doubt it will work to the overthrow of priestcraft. Yet, in the mean time, if the people of this country would have clean hands in the matter, and would not bring down upon themselves the curse of those who lend their strength to the man of sin, they must rise as a body and tell the Premier their mind, in terms that shall induce him to alter his contemptuous estimate of their opposition to his measure. It is possible that he has learned to despise them, from his successful disparagement of their views in the case of the Maynooth grant; and that he expects again to play off one party of his opponents against another, as he did on that occasion. them each declare their mind in the plainest terms; and let them resolve to act upon it in their selection of members of parliament. Thus alone will they convince men in power, that religious conviction is not a thing to be trifled with by legislators, and that expediency itself demands, that the claims of christian liberty be fully and readily conceded.

Let

DIPLOMATIC INTERCOURSE WITH THE POPEJ ON Tuesday 29th August, the third reading of the Diplomatic Relations with Rome Bill came on before the House of Commons. The discussion served to elicit the real ob jects of the bill, anxiously as these have been attempted to be concealed. Mr Monkton Milnes, in defending the measure, not content with ascribing the opposition to pure "fanaticism," avowed his wish to see the Papal authority and the genuine power of the Roman Catholic religion brought to bear on Ireland." On an amendment previously made in committee, to the effect

that "nothing contained in the bill should authorize intercourse on ecclesiastical matters, now forbidden by law," it was argued that such a restriction might, in some cases, prove inconvenient, and Canada was pointed to as an instance (Ireland being unmentionable) in which papal influence might be of use in the government of the people. The reserve manifested by the friends of this measure in divulging its real purpose is the best evidence which, in such a case, could be found of its discordancy with the known feeling and principles of the nation. In the face of all the expostulation offered from without, the bill passed the House of Commons on the 29th August, by a majority of eighty-eight against twenty-five. It is rumoured that the Pope refuses concurrence, on the ground that the bill declares ecclesiastics to be inadmissible as his ambassadors to Great Britain. For our part, we place as little reliance on the Court of Rome as on the Whig Ministry, for preventing the mischiefs involved in this meaThe Pope, an alien and the sworn. foe of every Protestant country, has now virtually been recognised as a power within this realm.

stire.

RENEWED REBELLION IN IRELAND.

THE recent disturbances in Ireland were denounced by the more cautious of the rebels as premature. No movement, it was said, should have taken place till it could support itself; and, to this end, it was advised, that the mustering of the rebel army should be deferred till the crops, gathered to their hand and lying on the fields, should afford ready and convenient pillage. Though this horrid plan has been defeated by the capture of the rebel leaders, their followers have not been able to unlearn so soon the idea of spoliation and robbery, with which the eloquence of their chiefs had made them familiar. In Tipperary and the neighbouring counties, the scene of the late disturbances, the sight of the harvest fields and stack yards has anew blown into a flame the embers of popular disaffection,. and maranding parties are abroad, helping themselves to the property of their neighbours wherever they see it exposed. If any thing were needed, beyond what facts had previously furnished, to prove that the people of Ireland are not fitted for the selfgovernment demanded by the repealers,, these acts of devastation and robbery which have resulted from the counsels of their leading men, complete the demonstration. It is plain that the Irish, as a nation, are not possessed of that self-restraint, and that. respect for law and equity, which form the safeguard of a community entrusted with the management of its own affairs. We

are unwilling to ascribe their faults to their Celtic origin; but whether it be this, or the degrading influence of the slavery they have endured so long, under an alien and avaricious church-establishment, or their training under a despotic priesteraft, or their schooling under O'Connell, who could with impunity raise the steam of popular excitement to the highest point, he himself watching the safety-valve and turning it to suit his purpose: whether it be to one of these causes, or to a combination of them, it is to be ascribed, the consequence is too manifest to be denied, that Ireland is not qualified to enjoy the amount of popular liberty which obtains in some other portions of the empire. The rapacity of the southern miners, when they see the fruits of the harvest lying within their reach, affords a faint emblem of what, we have too much reason to fear, would follow, if they had the national revenues of Ireland under their power. They ery for repeal, but are studiously careful not to tell what they want it for. If the Church be, as we doubt not it is, their master grievance, why not say so? They will not speak of overturning the Irish State Church. They declare, on the contrary, through the Romish representatives in Parliament, that the Church is not felt to be a grievance. Who can mistake the purpose of this pretended forbearance with what they deem an heretical and tyrannical hierarchy? They want to keep the church emoluments intact, against the time when repeal, or some other change, shall, as they expect, put the administration of Irish affairs in the hands of the Romanists. Parties among them have avowed such a purpose. We have heard of none amongst them that disavow it or reprobate it, and it would be inconsistent with the spirit and principles of Romanism if they did. Let them propose to apply the ecclesiastical revenues to the support of the poor, or any other national purpose in which no religious distinction is recognized, and they shall have the sympathy and co-operation of the friends of liberty in Great Britain. But while there is so much reason to believe that they are striving against one kind of tyranny, only to set up a tyranny of their own, they deserve all the mortification and defeat they have been receiving.

THE ENGLISH REGIUM DONUM.

DISSENT having at length mustered a little phalanx in the House of Commons, the country, not excepting the men of high degree, is beginning to hear something of the nature and the power of the Voluntary principle. The House being in committee of supply on Wednesday 23d August, Mr Lushington rose, pursuant to notice, to ob

ject to the first item in the vote, viz. L.1695, for Presbyterian dissenting ministers in England and Wales. This grant, as our readers probably know, was originally bestowed by George I. on certain poor dissenting ministers or their widows, under the name of Regium Donum; but on a new arrangement between the Crown and Parliament, was transferred to the civil list, and has since been provided for by an annual parliamentary vote. The recipients, about 350 in number, belong to the Presbyterian, Independent, and Baptist denominations, each of the favoured ministers receiving a sum never exceeding L.5. The great bulk of these dissenters, especially the Independents and Baptists, object to the grant, petitions having been presented against it from nearly 5000 ministers and their congregations, representing more than a million persons. One of the nine trustees through whose hands the money passes, has, according to the statement of the Premier, withdrawn on religious scruples from all share in the distribution of the grant. In appointing trustees, the Government, it ap pears, had selected Dr Rees, who had nominated the rest; but the different denominations from whose ministers the recipients are selected by these Government appointed trustees, have no direction or control in the matter; and it was felt by these denominations at large to be an insult and a degradation that the money should be voted as to "poor dissenting ministers." If parliament be resolved to give the money, let it, as one honourable member urged, be voted under its true designation, "a grant to Dr Rees, and certain clergymen selected by him, to be distributed at their sole discretion." The names of the recipients are concealed, a circumstance which Lord John Russell justified, on the ground that alms given in secret were on that account the more meritorious; and that the publication of the names might bring obloquy on the beneficiaries of the grant! The Premier's mind was evidently in a sad jumble. If a man is giving alms, does he wink hard and scatter his money among a crowd? No; he is bound to take care who gets his benefactions; else, for aught he knows, he is not giving alms, but increasing the abundance of the rich. And shall not the national alms be bestowed on the same rule, the nation looking to where it gives its charity? Is there obloquy in the receiving of this grant? Yea or nay? If there be not, why object to publish the names? If there be, then who so well entitled to bear the obloquy as the men who get the cash? and why will they roll the disgrace upon their brethren, if they insist on keeping the money to themselves? The noble Premier, who has of late grown grievously familiar with

fetches, caught on the nonce, and serving only a momentary purpose, attempted to evade the argument of the Dissenters, by twitting them on the necessitous condition of some of their ministers, and bidding them take the burden on themselves if they scrupled to leave it on the nation. Fine reasoning truly! To tell a man who objects, in any instance, to the wrongous expenditure of the nation's money, that he has but one remedy, viz. to pay the money out of his own pocket! Unreasonable, however, as this challenge was, it was at once taken up by an honourable representative in the dissenting interest, Alderman Kershaw, who engaged on behalf of the dissenters to raise the amount by voluntary contribution, rather than that they should be stigmatized by an annual vote of public money to "poor dissenting minis ters." In the promise thus made by Mr Kershaw, he has since, we understand, been well supported by Christians throughout the land. Steps have already been taken to raise the amount necessary to meet the Premier's challenge; and unless, ere the next annual voting of the fund shall come round, we have a new prime minister, who refuses to be bound by the promises of his predecessors, we may reasonably hope that the Parliament and the country has heard the last of that paltry driblet of an endowment, the English Regium Donum.

LADY HEWLEY'S CHARITY.-MORE

LITIGATION.

POSTHUMOUS and proxy benevolence has but small claim to rank among the virtues. What thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might. He who said, "I was eyes to the blind and feet was I to the lame," could add, "the cause which I knew not I searched out. The advantage effected by christian liberality would be increased many fold, were this precept and this example more steadily kept in view. The good and pious Dame Sarah Hewley, in A.D. 1707, instead of contriving that the wealth intrusted to her keeping by her Divine Master, should be spent to some good and pious purpose under her own eye, chose to leave a large portion of it-certain valuable estates in Yorkshire-under trust, constituting a race of men who were to come after her, and of whom she could have no certain knowledge, her factors in expending the Lord's bounty. For one whole century her bequest served as the buttress of deadly error, the abettors of Socinianism having succeeded in appropriating to themselves the provision which had been made for 'poor and godly ministers of Christ's holy gospel." At length, in 1836, at the instance of a number of gentlemen, headed by the late

66

Mr Wilson of Highbury, it was rescued from the Unitarians, in virtue of a decree in Chancery, declaring that none but Trinitarian Protestant Dissenters are entitled to administer these bequests. The credit of launching forth into the Chancery suit which terminated thus successfully for the truth, is due, undoubtedly, to the Independents: but it does not appear that this powerful body had previously held any consultation in the matter with the orthodox Presbyterians. The general terms, however, in which the decision was pronounced, induced certain ministers, orthodox Presbyterians, holding communion with the Church of Scotland and the United Secession Church, to propose, in behalf of ninety-five congregations whom they represented, a claim to participate in the bounty. This was on their part certainly a very natural proceeding, considering that the founder of the trust was herself a Presbyterian, and that the original trustees, seven in number, were all of the same persuasion. But the Independents resisted this claim, holding that, "in a fair, just, and honourable sense, the term Presbyterian may be applied to modern Congregationalists," and denying that any other than themselves were entitled to stand as the representatives of the English Presbyterian Nonconformists of the time when the charities were founded. It was remitted, therefore, to the Master of Chancery, to determine on evidence whether or not the congregations of orthodox Presbyterians in England are entitled to the character and privileges of English Presbyterian DissenIn June last, a decision was pronounced by the Vice-Chancellor, cutting off from the benefit of the charity the orthodox Presbyterians in England, who have any ecclesiastical connexion with Scotland. Against this judgment, as we anticipated, an appeal has been taken to the Lord Chancellor; and we observe that, for this step, the appellants have been assailed in no gentle terms by some of our English Independent brethren. A writer in the Patriot -one whose tone and spirit contrast strongly with the usually calm impartial bearing of that truly excellent journal, is highly wroth that men of Scotch descent or Scotch education should expect their religious labours to be recognized in the will of an English dame -just as if the pious Lady Hewley had ever indicated a desire that inquiry should be made as to either the genealogy or the alma mater of the godly ministers serving their Master in the localities whose spiritual profit she sought to advance by her benefactions. If their Presbyterianism be the offence of these rejected claimants, let this charge be declared by their opponents in this suit, who have succeeded ad interim in establishing a claim to be the exclusive re

ters.

presentatives of the old or orthodox Presbyterians of England. But if, on the other hand, the mark of Scotland be the plague spot: if a Scotch descent or a Scotch education is to be held a legitimate ground of exclusion, let the Patriot tell us how many faithful ministers, living and labouring in England, in connexion with various dissenting bodies, will have to be cut off from the privileges of orthodox English dissenters. To find the school-boy cry of "Scotch and English," echoed in the pages of the manly and candid Patriot, is to us none of the least grieving consequences of this litigation. But to the main question, as affecting our common christianity, is it not possible for the different claimants to unite in a compromise? The country will, by and bye, demand to know which of the parties have showed in the case most of that christian forbearance which might have led to such a measure. Why should they spend upon the lawyers the provision left for the support of Christ's ordinances? Let it be remembered, that the history of this plea will be sifted by those who come after us; that, with them, the difference between evangelical Presbyterianism and evangelical Independency, English christianity and Scotch christianity, will probably bulk far less than it does with some of us who mingle in these contentions; and that it will not be easy to satisfy an impartial posterity as to the grounds on which christian men persisted in wasting the patrimony of Christ's poor servants, and presented to the gaze of the world the spectacle of unbrotherly strife.

The moral taught in the history of this affair, from first to last, is of more importance than the money in question. Let those Christians to whom the Lord has given wealth, scize the hour to lay out the talent in his service, and seek the joy of beholding with their own eyes the fruits of their pious liberality. They have no right, unless it be under some natural or legal necessity, to roll over upon trustees who shall come after them, the work which God by bestowing their wealth has devolved upon them

selves.

DEGRADATION OF ENGLISH HOLY ORDERS.

THE Anti-English character of the English established church has too long escaped

the reprobation it deserves. The only slave in Great Britain is the man who accepts ordination at the hand of an English bishop. Liberty of conscience is secured to every individual class of British subjects, save one class, viz. those who enter into what is called "holy orders" in the Church of England. Our readers know the history of Mr Shore's case. He had the misfortune to be made a priest of the Church of England, unwitting that by such a step he made himself a slave for life. On awakening to a sense of his condition, he had recourse to the best legal opinion he could obtain; but, alas for the comfort of an English minister who has learnt to regard the will of his Divine Master as distinct from the will of his diocesan bishop! Application having been made to the Queen's advocate, Sir John Dobson, in regard to Mr Shore's case, the following is the opinion received :—

1. "I am of opinion that a priest in holy orders of the Church of England, although styling himself a seceder from that church, and being in fact a voluntary seceder therefrom, may be committed to prison for contempt of court in preaching as a dissenting minister contrary to the lawful monition of the court.

2. It is quite obvious that neither deposition from holy orders, degradation, or excommunication, can confer on a clergyman a legal right to officiate or preach as a dissenting minister.

3. "I think that if the bishop were to degrade and depose a clergyman from holy orders, he might be liable to the penalties imposed by the statute 41 George III. c. Ixiii., if he attempted to sit in the Commons House of Parliament.

4. "I am of opinion that excommunication would not entirely release a clergyman from his priestly character so as to give him the status of a layman."

Talk now of preferment in the Church of England! Such preferment is only a tightening of the chains which binds men from the exercise of the common privileges of British subjects. The long black surtout and shovel hat which some English clergymen are so fond to wear, may henceforth be regarded as the badge of the only relic of slavery which remains in free and happy England.

WE have in a previous article briefly narrated the early history of Peter Martyr, remarking his eager pursuit of knowledge in youth, his earnest attachment to reformed truth when it was discovered by him, and what persecutions he endured of his popish countrymen, till he was compelled to flee from Lucca. We now come, to view him in other fields of service, and labouring there in a somewhat different capacity. Since he embraced reformed truth he has appeared to us chiefly as a pastor and teacher of the church; henceforth, though these functions are not laid aside by him, he comes before us serving the truth principally as a theologian, in different seats of learning, and as a writer on the doctrines of the common faith.

After his departure from Lucca, Martyr came first to Pisa and Zurich, and, having met his friend Ochino, he went in company with him to Strasburg. Here he received a warm welcome from the numerous friends of the Reformation, and was rejoiced to find the learned and judicious Martin Bucer, from whose writings he had been first fully enlightened in the truth of Christ. In Strasburg he commenced expounding the scriptures as the colleague of Bucer; and though the two were considerably different, alike in their talents and

NO. XI. VOL. II.

manner of teaching, an intimate and delightful friendship drew close together their kindred hearts. For three years Martyr remained in this celebrated school of learning, during which he was married to a lady of distinguished excellence, and an ardent friend of the reformed cause. This union, during its brief continuance, was to him the source of exquisite felicity; and, when death suddenly took from him the desire of his eyes, he mourned her loss with a tenderness of grief, which was at once an honour to his own heart, and a noble tribute to the worth of the departed. In a singularly beautiful letter which he wrote on this occasion, he speaks of his partner in these affectionate terms:-"My sorrow and distress on account of my wife are still so fresh, that to write of her is a renewal of my grief, and, from your affection toward me, it will cause you uneasiness to know my affliction. When for a long time she had been afflicted with a violent fever, she committed herself to Christ; and God gave her so great faith, love, fortitude, and stedfastness in the confession of the truth even to the last, that all who saw her could not but regard it as truly wonderful. As for me, I rejoice at her happiness, yet I cannot but mourn my bereavement of her so unexpectedly at this time. By her unre

X