The Sun. — London, England, 1829-11-07 00:00:00

LITERATURE. THE FOREIGN REVIEW, No. viml. LONDON, 1829. W e regret to find the stale old visionary sub ject of phrenology—the very name of which quackery acts, we verily believe, as a scare-crow on nine -tenths of the English community—oc "Ping, at an inordinate length, the pages of so intelligent a periodical as the Foreign Review We thought that this science, ant quocunque also nonline gaudet, had been by this time Pretty neatly exploded, or at any rate that it was confined to crazy physiologists and half-witted logicians. The author, however, of the present dissertation seems inclined to raise it to the dignity of a philosophical science—with what success, those may learn who are hardy enough to peruse his arguments. " Letters on Germany," is the review of a book written by a native of Wurtemburg, on the subject of the personal and mental differences existing be tween the North and South Germans. The article is pleasant reading enough, but affords scanty materials for comment. " French Drama'' is sensibly and impartially written, and among, other pertinent remarks, contains the following ob servation, of which every one in the slightest degree acquainted with French dramatic litera ture will at once recognise the truth. " The faults . of Fren c h d ramat i c li terature are wan t o f imagination—ab sence of truth and faith in the style convenu '—its merits are purity of diction—judiciousness of plan—and a tact at arrange ment, so as to throw the faults into a dark shade by a bold relief of the beau ties.' " Bourrienne's Memoirs," is as its writer aptly observes, singular in the style and freedom of its comments. It is an elaborate attempt, bolstered up with showy declamation and specious sophistry, to depreciate and reduce to the level of common-place, the late Emperor Napoleon. B Y a singular process of logic, all this great man's virtues are proved to be nothing more nor less than vices ; even the high tone and quality of his ambition, which even his worst enemies one and all concede to him, are stated to have grown out of the basest and most vulgar Passions. 1 le is even denied " personal courage." " Napoleon," says this flippant Zoilus, " lacked Personal courage ; as he was base in mind, so W as he pusillanimous at heart." The reader of these startling assertions, made in the very teeth 0 f Europe's recollection of the warrior's conduct at Lodi, Arcola, the Pyramids, the shores of the Red Sea, and a hundred other places, will pro bably ask for proofs : unfortunately they are not .at hand to convince hint ; they exist only in the distorted fancy of the Reviewer. Another re ark, equally absurd, is, that " Napo leonN was the child of circumstances." — Z h at great man was ever otherwise ? "hat were Caner, Cromwell, and dozens of the same stamp, in the ancient as well as in the Modern world, but creatures of the same con troulling power ? Cxsar and Cromwell both set cut in their career of glory nearly at the same age when Napoleon quitted it. Why, because they were compelled to await the coming of the tide that should waft them onward to immorta lity. The test of greatness, whether religious, political, literary, or military, is not to fashion circ umstances—which is ridiculous and unin telligible, though we will allow it sounds well— but to make the most of them when they offer ;—not idly to strive to com pel the tide to flow, but when it is flowing, to divert it into a pro Fer and useful euannel- This Napoleon did, he took advan tage of the circumstances that surrounded him, a nd without appearing to controul them, so Inoulded them to his purposes as to ensure an u nquestionable supremacy over Europe. "As legisl • ator," the Reviewer goes on to say, " the E mperor was covered with a false lustre. The actual labour of reconstructing the laws was exe cuted by the ablest lawyers in the kingdom, in the shape of Commissioners, from whom it was carried to the Council of State, and from them to the Legislative Body." What trash is this ! In like manner may we say of St. Pa ul's, the actual labour of constructing it Was executed by the ablest workmen in th e kingdom, in the shape of day labourers, from whom it was carried to the over seers, and from them to Sir Christopher Wren. Y et who, f or all this, denies Sir Christopher the merit of having built St. Paul's ? His was the head to conceive and plan the majestic model; and so was it with Napoleon. The grand and simple fabric of the " Code" was projected by him, and by him, and him alone, brought to a state of completeness and general utility. But suPposing that he only selected the artificers for t his task, surely even in this case he deserves t he same praise that has been awarded to Elizabeth, a nd instanced by Hutne as among that h' h ig of her sagacity ; namely, she est had p the rootis acuteness and superior judg tnent to draw round her, and install into her government, those most likely to advance the glory of England ! There are a variety of other coarges brought forward wills singular pomp and exceeding impudence against Napoleon, which we have neither space, time, nor inclination to e unircent on, inasmuch as they are part and Parcel of those to which we have here briefly alluded. One thing, however, we may ob serve. 13ourrienne, the Reviewer's autho rity, is (he makes no secret of the avowal) a declared enemy to Napoleon. He conceives th at he was unjustly treated by him, and two volumes of vituperation have been the consequence. In addition to this, he is a pro fsessed Bourbenist ; and so far as we can learn, it is not orthodox among these precious politi cians, to sin in favour of the departed Emperor. A little generosity on this score, goes a great wa y tow ar d s ensur i ng t h e i r exc l us i on f rom the Tuileries. Evidence of this kind, therefore, can not but be tainted, and must and will be received every where with suspicion. "It is, however," says the R ev i ewer , , c daily received and acted ° t. n in our Courts of Law and penal inflie ,l""." So it is ; but certainly never until truth has been established beyond all question by other and more satisfactory proof: The evidence of M. Bourrienne to have its dtie weight must be corroborated ; single and unassisted it is nothing, or worse than nothing. We have ventured these few remarks in no ungracious spirit either towards the repentant Bourbonist or his Reviewer, but simply that justice—that cold cautious, common-sense meed of justice, which is awarded to the worst malefactor at the 01(1 Bailey—may be rendered to the memory of one of the greatest men that the world ever yet pro duced. The remaining articles in the present number we must dismiss with the remark that they are clever, intelligent, and amusing. The " History of the Cid" is particularly entertaining, in proof of which we give the following extract, descrip tive of this chivalrous Spaniard's character, with which we must conclude : "In closing our remarks on the character of the Cid, we may say that it is one of the proudest monuments of social perfection of which a noble nation has ever been justly proud. In youth Rodrigo sacrificed love to honour, avenging the latter by the death of the father of his be loved. As a Councillor and defender of his King, hesup ported him against the Emperor and Pope. As a sub• ject, he suffered with magnanimous forbearance the treat ment of the Sovereign, and only opposed him when the true dignity of the Crown called for such interference, in order to remove a (lark suspicion from the minds of the people. As a warrior he joined the most consummate prudence with the noblest daring, and having been all his life unconquered, he after death obtained the title of un conquerable. As a victor, he pardoned even those who had personally outraged him ; but he took terrible ven geance on the traitor, the usurper, the murderer, and the offender of the weaker sex. As a ruler he was enabled, by his integrity and love of order and justice, to govern in harmony a newly-conquered kingdom, encompassed on all sides with enemies, and inhabited by people differing in religion, language, customs, and interests. Finally, as a private man, as a husband, a father, and a friend, he re signed himself to every gentler feeling in the bosom of his family, and made himself adored by all who surrounded him. Such is the moral and political history of the Cid Rui Diaz. Few nations can present such a character in their annals, and yet the schoolmeu would seek to strip this character of its brightest colours, and is extinguish the noble sentiments of bravery and enthusiasm which its contemplation is calculated to inspire. To a certain ex tent they have unhappily succeeded, and the chronicles and romances of the magnanimous Cid Campeador are seldom mentioned by the scholar, save in terms of contempt ap plied equally—and we may say with equal justice—to their historic and poetical value. For ourselves, we must aver, that the delightful simplicity of style, and elevation of thought and feeling, which pervade these precious relics from a glorious former time, cannot be too strongly incul cated and encouraged among the Spanish people of our own unromantic period. Soon may the day arrive when the hills and vales of Spain shall resound, as of yore, with the praises of her loyal, just, and valorous Cid : for then might we hail the return of that noble, but now slumber ' ing spirit, which once led the Spaniards to conquest and fame in the fields alike of martial and literary glory, and which must, at no distant day, restore her to her rank among the nations!" THE CHURCH ESTABLISHMENT. (From the Cork Constitution of Tuesday last.) TO THE LORD BISHOP OF FERNS. Moore Park, Oct. 30, 18'29. My 1.011D,—1 have purposely refrained from returning a more speedy answer, wishing to give time to the public to digest deliberately the contents of our former letters. A. your Lordship cannot deny " that imperfections do exist in certain matters connected with our Church Esta blishment," you have with some dexterity endeavoured to extract from the troublesome reign of King Charles the First matter wherewith to damp the ardour of those who in modern times venture to complain against acknowledged abuses. As you know the difficulty of convincing us of that being right which in itself is wrong, (a power, ac cording to Bellarmine, belonging to his Holiness the Pope), it became expedient to appeal less to men's reason than to their fears. Accordingly you refer me to the overthrow of the Church Establishment—the murder of the King, and the placing of Cromwell on the Throne—" with all the evils, all the heresies, and all the schisms of that fatal period." Your Lordship would induce me to believe that petitions to Parliament against ecclesiastical abuses from persons who were united together in the doctrines of the Church of England, led principally to the evil conse quences you have noticed. And, therefore, your Lordship would have the laity at the present time wink at what is wrong, and passively suffer that which is hurtful to their own and to their neighbour's eternal welfare. Without attempting to advocate those who, in King Charles's reign made religion, as men have too often in all ages done, a step-ladder to temporal power, I must beg leave to say, that there were some other causes which mainly con tributed to bring about the unhappy events which your Lordship refers to. Allow me as briefly as possible to point out a few of these, which, together with the gene ral suspicion that King Charles was a Papist, must have had considerable weight. First, his attempt to raise money by taxes unauthorised by Parliament, especially by tonnage and poundage. Secondly, his lending a portion of the British navy to the King of France, his brother-in-law, even when he knew these vessels were to be employed in the subjugation of the French Protestants at Rochelle. Thirdly, the protection and favour he conferred on the imperious Buckingham, whom Echart, Archdeacon of Stowe, in his history, informs us was considered by the Commons to be " the corrupter of the King, and the be trayer of the people." Add to this, his opposing the right of Parliament to inquire into the public conduct of his Ministers. Fourthly, the committal of his suljects to prison for no legal offence, whilst even the benefit of the Habeas Corpus Act was withheld from them. Fifthly, the mismanagement of foreign and home affairs, the vexa tions the people had reason to complain of, and the failure that accompanied almost all his enterprises. No wonder a general discontent prevailed. But it is a dangerous thing for a weak Prince to struggle with his people for arbitrary power. When King John opposed his Barons the Magna Charta was first obtained, and Charles's opposition to the Commons gave birth to the Bill of Rights. Does your Lordship think that petitions for Church reform called for this last measure? If not, the cause of the Revolution and those ♦arious evils you make so much noise about, may with more truth be traced to another source, and religion will be found only to have been one of the weapons used in ' the contest. Your Lordship may contiuue to call the meeting in Cork a lay synod, and may attach to it the !slackest fore bodings ; but as you admit that " no system administered by men will ever be flee from imperfection" (too true) I think it is good to allow the laity in several ee,clesiasti cal matters to act as a check on the clergy, who are men subject to like passions and failings as others. This is the only way of checking that gradual corruption which we know deformed the Jewish religion of old, and afterwards the Christian professed by the churches of Greece and Rome, That the laity took an active part in religious af fairs in the primitive Chnrch no well-informed Protestant can deny. And by an Act passed in the reign of King Henry the Eighth (27 Hen. VIII. c. 15) I find sixteea of the laity, as well as sixteen of the Clergy, appointed to examine and report, even on the canons of the Church.— Again, in the reign of King Edward the Sixth, I find a similar number and proportion of the laity appointed for a like purpose (cue and 4 Ed. VI., c 11.) And the Hook of Statute contains other Am.ts t the. tame effect. I now name John Lucas and Richard Goodrich, Itscirs., as having been two of the laymen appointed in the foremen tioned Act passed in the reign of Edward the Sixth. Your Lordship will excuse me for reminding you of these occur rences having taken place so long previous to the reign of the unfortunate King Charles. And now allow me to ask why the laity are to be debarred the privilege in modern times of complaining again:A ecciesia4tical alansos, when laymen were readily suffered to take so active a part in the most important religious affairs at the reformation? To your Lordship's very comprehensive assertion that the statements made at the Cork meeting " are not founded on facts," I shall content myself with saying, such an as serGoo, without proof, will give the gentlemen in Cork very little uneasine.;4::. Not satisfied with my declaration that there was little in my speech intended exclusively for Ireland, your Lord ship next endeavour* to prove by an appeal to some of the public prints, several of'which I have not even seen, that I must have almost entirely excepted England. This is done with the view again to work on the fears of the timid, awl as in the first scene all the horrors of the reign •of King Charles were placed befor opr ,y e , so in scene the second we aye a separate attack on the establishment in Ireland. Qn this • oceasion the great leader of the Popish party" is to perform nairaclec. • The whole strength and subtlety of that party will be exerted to sup- port him in the attempt. They will ,etrleavour to up a Puritan party here in the nino,,iith century, as the ) did in England is the seventeenth." Certain Jesuits (thanks to the Relief Bill ), in the disguise of Puritans, will now appear upon the stage, " e xercising their ti lents ;" and what then ? Why then will members of the Church of England finch Out, perhaps too late, that the fortification's had been suffered to decay and fall to ruin— that too many of the watchmen had been careless of their duty—that the flocks had been neglected, and the fields sown with tares by the enemy, whilst the husbandman slept. And are they who declare the truth, and who seek in time to ward off the danger, who perceive the weak points which cannot be defended, and who wish to repair those breaches the destructive hand of time has effected, to be regarded as " unconsciously co-operating with our enemies?" What the enemies of the true faith may attempt against the Church of England it is difficult for me to point out with perfect precision, but still I know there exists much both in England and Ireland to be cor rected, And when your Lordship talks not only of the Popish party at the other side, namely England, but of the Dissenters of all denominations in that country, as also of v " that too numerous class of men who have no religion at all," I am forced to suspect the greater number of these are the result of a lax and corrupt discipline, arising either from a want of an adequate number of Clergy, or the ne glect of duties on the part of the present incumbents. This is a matter that deserves serious reflection and close inves- tigation. Your Lordship declares that " the idea that the inha bitants of a remote part of this country (meaning, of course Cork) should presume to think they were competent" to discuss affairs connected with the Church of England . „ _ would be scoffed at with contempt. And why so ? Is truth spoken at a meeting in London more matter of fact than when uttered in Cork ? Is not Cork an important city in Ireland, and has not the union between the two countries put an end to all invidious distinctions. But even were Cork a more insignificant place, why thus turn a deaf ear and a scornful look upon her ? My Lord, nei ther the precious ore that lies concealed in the lofty Andes, nor the sparkling gems from Golconda's sandy plains, shall lose their value when they may reach us from these remote quarters. Your Lordship, carefully keeping out of sight the inju rious system of appointing Bishops from political motives —a system not only ruinous to vit d and practical Chris- tianity, but detrimental to the best interests of our Church —a system which a corrupt Minister may at any time put in practice—would with much adroitness lead the public to suppose this is no fit subject for complaint. I am no speech-writer, therefore it is unfair to catch at a word which a reporter may, through inadvertence, insert. Whe ther I used the word " generally," when speaking of the appointment of Bishops, I am not able to remember; but I am satisfied in my own mind, Bishops, with few excep tions, are appointed through political intrigue. Still I have said before, and repeat it with satisfaction, that amongst our present Bishops some most pious, zealous, and truly Christian men, like the polished pillars of the temple, ornament, and at the same time in no small de gree contribute to support, our much-neglected Church. It is difficult to comprehend what your Lordship means when you tell the " that Great Britain," and still more " Ireland, is i❑ a state infinitely snore revolutionary than in the year 1628." What ! than England then preparing to shed a Monarch's blood, and Ireland then looking for- ward to that awful rebellion which broke out but thirteen years after! Still lam willing to admit that dieaffection to a considerable extent exists, but think it a bad argu- trent for perpetuating abuses. Let no one exaggerate things only for the purpose of gratifying worldly selfishness by intimidating the well-disposed, who clearly see the ne cessity of immediately correcting that which too long has neutralised the efforts of the most active individuals and so cieties. The abuses we complain of we know and point out, and feel the effects of far better than those evils your Lordship would so cleverly conjure up, and so pro phetically point at. And between your opinion that abuses " are under a rapid progress of correction," and ours that "we must take heed lest the establishment of our Church in this country be endangered, its hold upon the affections and esteem of the people weakened, and the manifold blessings we derive front it lost by the abuses which have crept into the administration of its temporal affairs," I leave the public to judge. The mode adopted by the lay friends of the church in Cork was, in my opinion, well judged. They excluded the clergy from the meeting, because they were desirous not to expose the re illy pious portion to the of the others. And they excluded the mob as not being very well quali fied to add importance or assistance to so serious a discus sion. The object woos to collect together gentlemen of edu cation, talent, respectability, and influence, who were known to be firmly and devotedly attached to our established church. What passed on the occasion was made public, but the whole of our proceedings might be closely sifted and investigated by every member of the church in the United Kingdom. This could nut have been done so well had your Lordship's posthumous advice, in the first place, been followed. Nor is it likely the proposed appeal from the humble individual who now addresses your Lordship would have produced the happy results you anticipate.— When your Lordship is so ready to question the right of a large body of the laity to notice ecclesiastical abuses it would be presumption in me to suppose my single voice could have effected all the wholesome improvements I now sanguinely anticipate. I regret I must also differ from your Lordship on another point, and insist on too many of the clergy having in and out of Parliament, directly or indirectly, contributed to wards the passing of the Relief Bill. Well do I remember the last division on this portentous measure, whilst, sit ting on the cross benches, 1 counted the number of lawn sleeves as they slowly moved behind the bar. As I viewed this act, and glanced at the probable motives, I plainly per ceived the danger of depending too much on the Right Reverend Prelates as sole guardians of our church. lam willing to admit that very many of our Bishops made a noble resistance, but this cannot acquit the bench in the eyes of the nation. Who can foresee the conduct of the Bishops when a fresh attempt may be made against the re ligion we profess? Alas ! had our clergy taken timely pains to teach in the schools and in the colleges, in the pulpit and in the private Louses, the important and yet nearly forgotten differences between the religion of the Bible and that of the Pope, many Members of both Houses would have voted very differently. That many Clergy men were most active in getting up petitions to Parlia ment against emancipation is, I believe, very true, and I hope their motives proceeded rather from a love of true Christianity than of temporal and political power. As your Lordship disapproves of ray saying that the Bishops have contributed towards " pulling down the wall of par tition," I beg to refer you to the words used in the Act of Parliament, " Be it therefore enacted by and with the ad vice and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal, &c." Surely, my Lord, you are not going to drive your coach and four through this Act ? The deed, we are told, was done by and with the advice of the Lords spiritual. With respect to the union of parishes, I am only em barrassed to compress into a short space the matter I possess. To your Lordship's assertion, that bishops have no longer the power of uniting parishes, I can only say, 1 know of one in this very county, the parish of Moviddy, united so late as the year 1818 (1 shall leave your Lord ship to find out who'got it) ; and was las well versed in the ecclesiastical register as your Lordship is, I have little doubt I could point out several others. Unions were of two sorts, perpetual and pro hac rice. The former were made by the authority of the Loud Lieu tenant of Ireland, with the assent of at least six of the Privy Council, and the approbation of the diocesan, pa trons, and incumbent. The latter were made by fr;e bOtep alone, with the assent of patron and incumbent, which, of course, was not very difficult to obtain. It is quite deplorable what jobbing was thus effected in unions, and how religion has been too often sacrificed to the interests of a young man or the ambition of an old one. What ought we also to say of the rich and po pulous livinv attached to cenonries, deaneries, prebends, &c,, often situted at a distance of 50 or 60 miles, and several possibly much farther? Where does the incumbent usually reside ? How does lie fulfil the duties of the pa rish ? And in what degree is he the promoter of the spi ritual welfare of his people? I myself know one who is a dignitary in Munster, and who at the sante moment holds a large living in Connaught. And pray what goad car, the people reap from tr;e talents of this clerical absentee I know of one union not far fertm this place which is valued between 3,0001. and 4,000/. a year. It is formed of five pa . rishes, which until the pausing of the late Act in the year 1827 could not have been dissolved , — As to the union' pro hoc vice, the contiguity of paFisltes has been ttivn talyarriage of to a inst ' mi warrantable extent, to unite those whiph hal always previoatilY sup ported separate Clergymen and separate Churches—reserv ing further particulars, names of parishes, aye, and names of Clergymen too, for I have a tolerable stock of facts on hand, for another occasion, I beg at present to call your Lordship's attention to the return made by the Bishops Vl' Parliament in the year 1820, F r . , ' rebus peafo y ; the Toeesea o' there were' fifty-nine pAriSlies united' into forrtenbeneclr : eo Of one of these; the Bishop triruS e lf }iesist;s of 34,019 and ce;tait-ay might to be dissolved ! This was not a solitary case. At the same period it also ap p e ared, there were in the dioceses of Cork and Ross, 107 parishes united iato seventy-seven benefices, with only 6oty-three incu nit o's r. si.lent near enough to perform the duties! In t e of Cloyne (where I reside) I find at that peri i parishes united into seventy-seven benefices, and, th lest. the Ilisletp who then filled this sec, represented forty—ix inetoolatnts as being resident, it is isall known how U .true sz,l:!.• 'f his Lordship's statements were. These fr tots tiket, trout public documents, -pe,.k for thernselv , s, ought to suffice. As for plu ralities, your Lordship will, prebst.ly, give me an oppor tunity of speaking of these another time. It is really laughable to observe the stress your Lordship lays on the t L w shadows im o erick.The o a These, I p e riFe .anhasssumreentyiooni,edwle,ytle have Bishop noo)objec tion tion to leave under the holy keeping of their present guar dians, or, if you please, for the benefit of those who love sinecures. But they prove the necessity of a new divi sion of parishes, were the attempt possible. It is also rather laughable to observe how feelingly you allude to the tithes in lay hands. I have not Mr. Foster's evidence by me, but I am satisfied all he may have stated can never go so far as to prove the necessity , of continuing the present too lucrative and extensive unions—unions where the " ivy-mantled" ruins of churches stand re proachful testimonies of past neglect, whilst the very lands, often marked in the Down survey "Protestant lands," be cause they had been once colonized by Protestants, have been suffered to sink into the darkest state of ignorance and Popery'. After losing, not thousands, but tens of thou sands and hundreds of thousands of Protestants for want of Ministers and Churches, the necessity of correcting the fatal oversight has at last been discovered. Your Lordship assures me, since the union of the two countries five hundred have been built, but the plan on which they are usually constructed only proves hose little the builders cal culate on a large increase in congregations. Would it not my Lord, be t better to provide more accommodation, and spend less on cut stone and external ornament, es pecially when you complain of a want of funds ? I have heard it said large sums remain with the Board of First Fruits, which have never been accounted for. This I can hardly credit. But as your Lordship allows " that not one-tenth of the applications which have been made to the Board could be complied with," the wants of this country, from the very admission, must be sufficiently evident. Were the real value of a benefice for the first year (as ori ginally intended) to be paid in by instalments, instead of the very limited sum fixed in the days of King Henry the Eighth, I am satisfied not only the Board of First Fruits could effect every necessary object, but a large surplus re maining on hand might be devoted to the support of the distressed widows and orphans of the clergy. Your Lordship, I rather think, has acted incautiously, when you say " that no law can be framed that would afford a stronger sanction, or give more effectual protec tion to curates, than that which makes void all bargains in evasion of the salaries to which it entitles them." Allow me to remark, that the Act cannot be enforced un less the curate complains of his rector, which, in most cases, will either deprive him of the curacy, or involve him in complicated law proceedings, not to speak of its destroying that harmony which ought always to exist be tween the clergy of the same parish. In the second place, by the very terms of the Act it cannot operate, except in cases where another abuse pre-exists, namely, non-resi dence. Thus, either the rector must be absent, or the curate may be starved. To your Lordship's theory I as sert that present practice is opposed. And will your Lord ship, in your next, dare the to the test? Your Lordship " having set aside all higher motives for adopting the profession (of the Church) as being un connected with the secular interest now under considera tion," it was natural I should follow the example, and confine myself to the three degrees of comparison you de clared to possess such powerful attractions. Indeed I ac knowledge " a maintenance" in these hard times worthy of attention, that " a competence" is a thing " devoutly to be wished for," and that many will risk both body amt soul in the attainment of " affluence." No wonder pru dent parents, who love their little boys, should fix a long ing eye on the snug things of the Church. Oh ! what would they do, or rather what would they not do, to obtain a good living for the younger son ; and, should he be unfit for other professions, how much inure desirable must that be where little exertion is required, and little labour performed? But your Lordship with great simplicity asks, " If such in ducements did not exist, where should we find persons duly qualified ?" My Lord, 1 answer amongst the pious and the good, whose hearts are devoted to God and their affec tions to their neighbour, and who " count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord."—(Philippians, ch. iii. ver. 8.) Remember it is not always an expensive education that renders a man ta lented—still l ess plans—and the wisdom of this world is not so much praised in the sacred scriptures. As in the Protestant churches of France and Scotland the great at tractions we speak of were not indispensable for the acqui sitiou of necessary qualifications, so the rich golden baits in our church are useless for the purpose. It indeed deserves remark that in Abe days of poverty and persecution true Christianity most flourished. Whilst I rejoice to see so many " burning and shining lights" amongst our own clergy, I cannot believe that worldly' considerations ever enlightened their minds or converted their hearts. And now allow me to put a question to your Lordship. Do you think the greater number of hard working and zealous curates have been led to embrace holy orders from the inducements you consider so indispensable? What hope have they of eventually a good living, or even a bishopric, whilst neglect and penury stare them straight in the face? I find little calling for remark relative to Bishops' leases. If your Lordship's assertion be correct, that in running his life against a lease " a Bishop would, under the pre sent laws, be a loser by the attempt," how shall we ac count for the imprudence of those who still resort to the old practice ? As for the eight per cent. concern, with the compound interest, and such-like private matters, per haps I ought not to inquire into them too clo,ely. But I am still satisfied the Church property was in the beginning set apart for the benefit of the Church, and that circum stances prove the peculiar necessity of its nosy being em ployed to the best advantage. I further believe what may be for the temporal benefit of the Clergy may not always be for the spiritual welfare of the people. I must now touch on a very delicate subject—one which appears to have made some impression already on your Lordship's sensibility. 1 ventured to say it was evident from the tenour of your former letter you had the interest of a favoured portion of the Clergy chiefly in your mind, whilst I was looking to the spiritual wants of the people. And what says your Lordship to this ? "My Lord, I call upon you to point out the part of try letter upon which you found this monstrous charge! 1 demand it! ! !" You then continue thus--" There is no part of that letter which has any connection with the subject, except that which relates to the incomes of the Clergy." rely Lord, your Lordship has in these last words supplied an answer to your own question. It is pretty clear the For curates are not the favoured portion, and when I find you so little inclined to assist me in correcting gross abuses in our Church Establishment, so much of temporal and so little of spiritual things in your communications, am I so touch to be blamed for coming to an obvious conclusion ? I ant glad your Lordship is obliged to admit (though irl a very qualified manner) that Clergymen aye wonting in Ireland. You still appeas inclined to leave the poor igno rant Roman Catholics a long time the victims of neglect and deception. But, troublesome or difficult as it may be, allow me here to hint it is the duty of the parish Clergyman to attend to all his parishioners. Roman Catholics in this country contribute towards his income, and ; .hey Isaye, therefore, a f a ir c laim on his tiene and see aces. The worthy and zealut. Miniateee r ug hays devoted their attention caithfstlly lo : AliiS * object, have, it is well known, effected much. But, alas ! too much of a worldly spirit prevails, and many Clergymen, from selfish motives, a love of ease, and want of Christian philanthropy, think much about the tithes, hut little about the people. Your Lordship txtN' assert what you please about tie lower ordes of ii - Sroteatants being well taught. The contrary is s? Mitosious I shall not cende.Fend to pros'a ',et the public judge whether they ha v e not been neglected, whether they are not in gene rSd very ignorant of their religion, and whether their works prove their faith. I ougl.t to knew that schools have been established by a Dumber of societies, that some of Clergy and some of the laity have done in :heir power to advance religious etbsc4issis, cud that large stuns are dts vatcd to this purpose. ''BUt still I knOw the 16Wer orders of Protestains—for - it is not alw4s they who benefit nos indeed by our institutions---are am satisfied a thousand s urs,tte;en s ib ta,trate the £aeton ~sse naiboonvg.es,t, isl uicl would, were oitttllillarc satiszed the , r themselves t ;,1 ; o f our` Clergy, tylu, 'c yet t a l : e it e ' r t o l an it it t: c : t st'dset y ing polst;on i t e r e u l t i i i:g o s f a t r i i ) ( o lwhilst, convinced of the , t, i o l :tl S se r i i r Ping and covetous class. They will understand my by we have tbe tesneSs ‘ t those n()w resolutions lnY meaning,adoiited prayers and their good wishes.. .110 yosir 'tor& ship calls my attent 4 7 cOntrposli,liStr, y'ou ssis!'sica sappor(Oi. year 'OPitsiOn: In 10 laSt 'decia . red thew` . ban . te'te'lst`e'd simple icindetj i lia.ta Sviiere , they had site s iequired the full average o f I.Se ;ants preceding years from the passing of the Act, it would ha ve b een i mposs ibl e f or an y commutatio n t o h ave taken pk ce , for this plain lesson, that in consequence of the subsequent fall in the prices of corn and othel - 7 (which sold fur ne4rly double price ' 19 , 6 '1'5 4151:ne ' Qf 'OM former years) the average to be obtained from prosperous times could never answer for depressed ones. If your Lordship was aware of this, which I think probable, from your known ability and expel iere the attempt had better not have made, to pr o ve how a few simple Clergymen had be e n gulled by the cunning laity. I have beard none of this Clergy complain (except your Lordship), because it is unreasonable Inc a man to feel dissatisfied when he receivss as much or more than before, in a more satisfactory and less troublesome way.—And to your Lordship's question, " Did I ever hear the parishioners assert they had paid more than the real amount of their tithes?" I answer I have—the people of --; but no, I will not hurt the feelings of a Clergyman who possesses many good qualities. And does your Lordship infer, from the diffe rent appeals to the Lord Lieutenant in Ceuncil, that the parishioners who complained had cause to be satisfied ? As to the vice and immorality which is suffered to pre vail amongst the depraved and corrupt Clergy, it were better your Lordship had passed this over in silence, sticking at the words " various petitions ;" or separating England from Ireland one moment, for one purpose, and then joining them together the next, for another purpose, will never clear away a well-founded charge. Pray what did a Right Reverend Prelate say when a certain petition was presented in the House of Lords ? Did he not com. plain of the difficulty and expense that attended the pro secution and punishment of clerical profligacy? And what has been done since? Did not a divorce pass the House of Lords, no later than last session, the guilty cause of which was a Reverend seducer? And when these shameful instances of immorality occur, where is the facility for the poor and the oppressed to obtain redress ? I know of many cases, which have disgraced our Church in the eyes of the Roman Catholics, and which have naturally led them to think lightly of our religion. But that system must be wrong, which seldom or almost never punishes those Clergy, who are not only instruments of Satan to seduce souls from the path of virtue, but who are instruments of Satan to debase, and if it were possible, to overthrow our Religion. lam sorry, my Lord, to see you the self-appointed advocate of so bad a cause. Before I end, allow me to remind your Lordship once more, of our firm intention to defend the Church property, and not to suffer its spoliation. I have already expressed my wish to see the Bishops and Archbishops of our Church amply provided for, but I well know the time is come when a change must take place in the temporal af fairs of the Church—the advantages of such a measure cannot be better expressed than in the sentiments of the zealous and learned Bishop Jewell, who, in a letter to Shnler, writes as follows—" we hope our Bishops shall Ise paatcrs, labourers, and watchmen. And that they may he better fitted fur this, the great riches of Bishoprics are to be diminished, and to be reduced to a certain mediocrity, that so being delivered from the king-like pomp, and the noisiness of a courtly family, they may live in greater tranquillity, and have more leisure to take care of Chi ist's flock with due attention." Does your Lordship not approve of such noble sentiments, coming as they do from so good and great a Bishop of our Church ? Allow me to refer you for this extract to Bishop Burnet's History of the Reformation, vol. 3, page 207, (A. D. 1559), a source which I think may be received as un questionable. Not having the fear of two or three irritated prints be fore any eyes, and equally disregarding the praises of those who may laud me from bad motives, I shall be ever ready to exert my humble eflOrts in the great and good cause of the Church of England. Aud whilst I deeply regret that your Lordship enters so little into my feelings, I cannot help commending the following text of Holy Scripture for your private serious consideration. " But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righte ousness, and all these things shall be added unto you.— Mat. c. 6, v. 33. I have now done. If in advocating what is most for the welfare of the Church and State, any expression has escaped me which may he considered exceeding the proper limits of respect, I hope your Lordship will attribute it to any thing but a desire on my part to cause the slightest offence. I have the honour to be, my Lord, Your Lordship's well-wisher and obedient servant, MOUN ['CASHEL RETURNS MADE BY THE MINISTERS OF FINANCE AND JUSTICE, WHICH FORM TILE FRENCH BUDGET FOR 1830, ACCORD ING TO TILE ORDONNANCE OF THF. 25T11 OF LAST MONTH. RETURNS OE THE MINISTER OF FINANCE. Francs. Civil List 2,301,000 Secretary of State, and the Grand Corps d'Etat 1,041,668 Foreign Department 660,875 Department of Justice Department of the Interior 9,800,000 Department of the Culte Reforme 4,400,000 Department of the Culte Catholique Department of the Marine and Colonies 6,000,000 Department of the Finances 24,771,207 Department of War 16,590,000 63,750,000 RETURNS OF THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE. ..--, -..... The Central Administration, including the Sa laries of the Ministers The King's Councillors, including the Minister of the Household and Councilloi sof State 572,300 The Court of Cassation 1,006,000 The Royal Courts 4,445,775 The Court of Assize The Tribunal of the First Instance The Tribunal of Commerce The Tribunal of Police 69,400 The Justices of Peace The Pensions The Expences of Justice The Privy Seal 73,000 83,376,220 SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. HUNTING INTELLIGENCE. ATPOINTMENTS FOR THE ENSUING WEEK. The Brighton Harriers on Monday, at Patcharn ; Wed nesday, at the Race Course ; and Friday, at the D y ke—at Half-past Ten. The Brookside Harriers, on Monday, at NewrearLet- Hill ; Wednesday, at Ashcombe, the alteroaW Wedoesde,y at the Kennel ; and Friday, at Telscoin . be Tyo—at past 'fen. The Cottesmore Houndi, on Monday, at Park House; Tuesday, at Cole's Lodge; and Thursday, at Tickencote Lawn—,at a Quarter before Eleven. Earl Fitzwilliam's Hounds, on Monday, at Ashton Wold ; Wednesday, at the Kennel ; Thursday, at Aversly Wood ; and Saturday, at Lilford—at Ten. Sir Richard Sutton's Hounds, on Mor,.k.y, ,st Half way House on the Newark-road ; '4'uesday, at Gate Bur ton ; Thursday, at Candesisy Village and Burton Kennel ; and Sator4a7,' a Girsby House and Blankey—at Eleven. The Royston Harriers, on Tuesday, at Green Man ; Shepreth ; and Thursday, at th,! Crown, Kelf.ll;l6--. 'bal . -past Ten. The Doddington Harriers, on Tki . .sday, CavOry Barn ; and Friday, at Fendi l s :.e. _ . •• , 711! c2ioo,tr.icisesire liounds, on Monday, at Eltisley rect:t ; and ridgy, at Patton Wood—at Half-past Ten. the P,uckcridgo Hounds, on Monday, at the Kennel ; Wednogday, at Takeley; and Saturday, at Cutubelow.:.al . Half-past Tea. Sir Richard Pulleston's Hounds, oo lifonclay, at Sarn bridge ; and Saturday, at (Iteig )fiark—at Eleven. ‘,:o; rtioluda, ou Tuesday, at Woore ; Th9rsdai, a,4 Seigaord; and Saturday, at Wiliow.bridge —nt'aalr.past Ten, The Shropshire Fox Hounds, on Tuesday, at Acto4 Burnell; Wednesday, at Acton Reynald ; Friday, at Sun durne Castle; and Saturday, at Ercall-;11 7 - Ralf-past Ten, Wa i i.Uri FOR FIFTY POUNDS 'Ouraday week a match was run u ,, ,c.n Haigh P4th Race conrse, for 501. a-side, between lilac poney and JJclison, the ce,labiAted pedestrian, on,e hundri,d and ten yard,, `41.7y stirted on the fgi:l 't ti piital, and the y acc was wyri eau by the fotrgsv, as Jackson gave up when had run only half thti distanee. EXTRAORDINARY FOX CMAsE. The Slinfold harriers unkeunel:ea a dog-foN a n 11nainh morning, near Alansbarn, in the pariah cf litc.hingeld, at half-past eight o'clock : aild r4n hi 7 !pin), until 54 inipoci time tlic r , Cris 1:2,n in, to him past three, seven lioni - JiMa 25, tnini.tea, at which and at South End, near tlai (TabfTee, in the `mash of Lower Reeding. Dming jhe claap 11;.y passed through the parishes of Itehingfield, Via&liatn, :Shipley, West Grinstead, Nothurst, &e. The sportsmen followed on foot, witl , c t eevcption of Mr. M. Standford, whose I',c , ,r4e Iva! completely knocked up at Nuthurst, left. Mr. gtandford then followed fort, and ; waSizi at the deai.h., It is coin puted die fp-2/(o'vere(/ of sixty miles of vound, `'The men ap.d. dogs were quite exhausted. It is believed x hunt can scarcely and a parall;'.,, a 0, - 47;gAtori Quardian: SPIRIT OF THE PUI3LIC JOUR: The Bishop of Ferns caught what is vult, , called a " Tartar," when he challenged L 6: Mountcashel to debate with him the question of Irish Church Reform. The Noble Earl has \\ published a rejoinder to the last attack of the Right Rev. Bishop, and if we were confidants or authorised advisers of Dr. Elrington, we should undoubtedly say to him—" My Lord, you have had enough of it—depart in peace, while you have yet a leg to stand upon." Lord Mountcashel goes forward, heedless of whatever intemperance or extravagance his learned as sailant may have betrayed, and in a patient, but spirited and conclusive exposition of the state of the Church of Ireland, past and present, en forces each of his preceding propositions in a manner which to the Bishop of Ferns will per haps be not quite satisfactory. In reply to the absurd parallel drawn between the causes in ope ration against the Church Establishment in the year 1628, and in the 19th century, Lord Mountcashel takes an unpitying advantage of the barbarous ignorance of history, or contempt for it, which distinguishes the warnings of the Bishop. It will be recollected that the Rev. Prelate has thought fit to deprecate all attempts at inquiry into the existing abuses of the Church of Ireland, because the investigations of ended in an overthrow of the Church of Eng land. It may be well disputed how much the country lost by the successful resistance made frogi 1628 downwards, against the system of the tyrannical and half-papist Laud ; though it may be asked with equal reason, what the cause of liberty or of religion gained by the execution of that obnoxious pre, late. But to revive Dr. Elrington's forgotten or suspended knowledge of the circumstances which really produced the overturn of Church and State in the time of Charles, and from the influ ence of which we are now providentially exempt ed, Lord Mountcashel proceeds as follows: " Your Lordship would induce me to believe that petitions to Parliament against ecclesiastical abuses, from persons who were united together in the doctrines of the Church of England, led princi pally to the evil consequences you have noticed. And therefore your Lordship would have the laity, at the present time, wink at what is wrong, ant passively suffer that which is hurtful to their own and to their neighbour's eternal welfare. Without attempting to advocate those who in King Charles's reign made religion, as men have too often in all ages done, a step-ladder to temporal power, I must beg leave to say, that there were soma other causes which mainly contributed to bring about the unhappy events your Lordship refers to. Allow me, as briefly as possible, to point out a few of these , which, together with the general suspicion that King Charles was a Papist, must have had considerable weight. First, his attempt to raise money by taxes unauthorised by Parliament, especially by tonnage and poundage. Secondly, his lending, a portion of the British navy to the King of France, his brother-in-law, even when he knew the vessels were to be employed in the subjn, gation of the French Protestants at Rochelle, Thirdly, the protection and favour he conferred on the imperious Buckingham, whom Echart, Arch _ deacon of Stowe, in his history, informs is was considered by the Commons to be" the corrupter of the King, and the betrayer of the people." Add to this, his opposing the right of Parliament to inquire into the public conduct of his Ministers. Four' hly, the oommittal of his subjects to prison for no legal offence, whilst even the benefit of the Habeas Corpus Act was withheld from them. Fifthly, the mis management of foreign and home affairs, the vexa tions the people had just reasons to complain of, and the failure that accompanied ;Almost his enterp r i ses. No wonder a general discontentent prevailed, But it is a dangerous thing for a weak Prince te, struggle with his people for arbitrary power. When Kin g , John opposed his Barons, the Magita Charta was first obtained, and Charles's opposition to the Com mons gave birth to the Bill a Bights. Does your Lordship think that petitions for church reform called for this last measure? If not, the cause of the Revolution, and those various evils you make so much noise about, may with more truth be traced to another source, and religion will be found oilly to have been one of the weapons used in the contest," It must, indeed, appear to those of our read ers who, unlike Dr. Elrington, are acquaipAed w ith the history of Engle,a, that the leaven of arbi trary power was what really set the minds of men in a ferment, by mixing itself up with ali dissen sions upon the rights of the people and the abuses of their Government,—that resistance on the part of the Court to every redress of griev ances, and on that of the leading Chun to every investigation of abuses or -,aalpractices generally charged upon the ae:-,gy was the real , and crowning injury whirl:, provoked the nation, and produced a clia7;asement of the offenders in Church and otate, which Dr. Elrington and others his character would d o we ll t o k ee p telerf'ore of itleir , eyes, even though th e y s h u t th em ever so obstinately to all other portions of our annals, Lord Mountcashel is correct both as to fact and reasoning, where he rebukes the sneer of Bishop Elrington at what his Right Reverence is pleased to call " Lay Synods." The laity, who defend the Church and support it, and for whom, under correction, the Church itself was instituted, have an inherent and inalienable right toinvestigate, prosecut e , a nd t o a b o li s h alaises, If there were to be no l a y 1 1- l b,, murs at the Church, we should like to ask when is it likety that a " Synod" would bring: about a redress or. Church a b uses ? Woulil those who have lon g dispensed a worldly sordid, and, corrupt patronage, com plain of that patronage as an evil ? No ; the Bishops would neither peach upon their. in"etbren, nor deprive themselves of prerogatives however perwaed, And as for what are de scribed as the " well-connected," high-born, ill ...d;:ici,‘,ted, insolent, and useless minions of blind favour, and unmerited wealth, who fill alternately stalls and watering-places, known to their pa rishioners no otherwise than as recipients of tithes,—is probable that such men would de '", nouncaa system which forced theßishopsto be - stow every valuable preferment upon them, to t h e ex elusion of unpatronised and unpr ected Clergy , men, many of whom will be bP, e .ter known to th e theological students of ft).'.ure generations, than to their own Bishops a t th e present d ay ? A reformingSr).'nElNirin trulyioV w 3l i ShaeSniiej l oke l s lo ! We shall finish by ;voting from Lord Mountcashel a passage ix.l,ating to the manner in which the ChureA, of Ireland continues to be deprived of I , f npfbents, and the majority of incumbents Pinched out of their revenues by the scandalous • • 'a young man, or Q-Xcese to which episcol\at unions have been, been too carried : eff:ctlerdisitr ‘k i a t7 cm a s, epforable what jobbing '.VAS finis livings attached ;e. ca , we als'ett o and how religion o t h e tcra4 b le i r tio irte e d f to an otlitileoinnet.eres\t\:onfat ought farther W - ncie does the incumbent rue o ie f s t , he l.iebari deaneries, d and several possibly much, distance of 50 or ' O O often situated at a side - ftow does he f u lfil t h e d ut i es o f t u l s ie ua p l e l) :l,l l l .e c what degree is he the promoter of the spiri tdiil welfare of his people ? I myself know et one: who is a dignitary to Munster, anti isle at the same