Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-12-07 00:00:00

EDUCATION AND SECTARIANISM. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN TIMES. Sir,—Year report of the proceedirgs which took place at the Collegiate Institution, on Thursday night, informs the 20we, that we are about to have another education and reliion agitation. The Rev. Dr. M•Neile is to appeal to the public ofLiverpool on the question of the Middle Class Examina tion Scheme, sanctioned ant suggested by the University of Oxford. We are invited to desire, not whether that scheme is to be tried—for I presume it will be tried whether we like it or not—but whether the public of Liverpool wit formally approve of a scheme for educational examinations in which religious examination does not form an indis pensable portion. I hope the town will accept the challenge in the fullest sense. If we gain nothing else by such a discussion, we shall at least have a landmark set up by which we can tall what extent, since the last struggle of the kind in Liverpool, intellect and free thought hare redeemed and conquered from sectarianism and darkness. Th 3 scheme, as it stands, has some deficiencies, which will easily occur to most minds. It has, to my mind, the one great defect pointed out by Mr. Denson, at the Collegiate meeting, that it introduces the religious element at all. Bat, such as it is, it is a positive good of some degree—soother stimulus to exertion, a new opening for intellectual ambition. The question, then, is, are we to reject this scheme altogether, bec au s e re li g i ous education forms no necessary qualification for a share in its advan tages. There is no question before us of whether we will have this scheme or one in which religious education is a principal element. The question is, whether we will have this scheme or none at all. Any one who endeavours to present the issue in any other shape is utterly mislead ing the mind of the public. How, then, is it possible that any general system of examination could be adopted in which a test of the candidate's Scriptural knowledge should form •an inevitable element ? Are the candidates merely to •be examined as to their power of repeating by rote pages and chapters of the Bible, and the etude+ to gain honours who can tell off the greatest number of sentences ? This is a test of the candidates' memory, not their Scripture knowledge, of which I presume no one would dream of making the Bible an instrument. Is the enquiry to be as to the knowledge candidates have of the historical facts detailed in the Bible, with no reference to their meaning, or the deductions to be drawn from them ? At the very best, this would nut differ from an ordinary historical examination in the most inferior kind of diy school, where the scholar parrots a certain number of answers to " Mangnall's Questions," and gets " good marks " for his history, of which, when all is done, he really knows no more than does his printel task-book on whose pages the names, dates, and events are stereotyped. if then, we are to have anything at all, we must have a full and genuine enquiry into each candidate's real knowledge of the Bihla, his comprehension cl its teachings, his per ception of its truths. And then, what becomes of our general examination for all classes ? What single chapter of the Bible is there whose meaning will be explained with the same interpretation by the Estatlished Church scholar, the Quaker, the Bapt a , the Unitarian, and the Roman Catholic ? We cannot assent to the foolery of an examination with no reference to meaning. The moment we come to test a can didate's comprehension of the meaning. we must set up some fixed standard of doctrine by whieh to decide ; and the moment we set up this standard we exclude all sects but that which is dominant in the State. Either, then, we must have the scheme without making the religious examination necessary, or we must have none at ail. But Dr. M'Neile goes b ddly in for the full meaning of his opposition. Ile prefers n ) e 'ucation whatever to edue Won without religion. What education without religion might be, we need not discuss, since happily it is not possible that any such thing could exist. We may, however, consent to accept the words fer the present, in Dr. MeNeile's sense. By education without religion, ha means education without the doctrines of the English Pro testant church—by the English Pro testant church he means that section to which he himself belongs. Am in educated without re:igion is a man edugated with any other interpre tatien of religious doctrines but that which Dr. M'Neile him self insists upon. By an infidel is meant any one who does not believe in Dr. M'Neilo. This, therefore, is the plain meaning of the opposition to the present scheme Dr. M‘Neilis will oppose every scheme of education which does not run in the grooves of hit own doctrine. " A bad man with education is more dangerous than a bad man pith none." This sentiment, enusciated by Dr. M'Neile, is echoed approvingly by the Rev. Mr. Howson, who, indeed, seems to have been so much alarmed at the loud-voiced opposition he had raised that he was only too happy t catch at any point of agreement with his antagonist. What is an abstract " bad man ?" What man, good or bad, has 720 education ? Have we, who are all of course the good men, any power whatever of preventing our bad brothers from gettiog education, or of limities the deuce Os, I, 101.1 r lid r , ccoi. good rnen alike can and will have education whether we like it or not, we should do better by endeavouring to mane that which they will have valuable and useful, than by a futile endeavour to force on them something which half-a. dozen of us happen to think better. A bad man with physical health is more dangerous than a bad man without it. Shall we then keep all sanatory improvement from those who will not receive our sectarian dogmas along with our well water ? A bad man acquainted with the Bible is more dangerous, in the same sense, than a bad man who has never opened the volume. Dr. M'Neile, who warns his audiences so frequently against the use made of Scripture texts by Roman Catholic priests and subtle infidel writera might have remembered this view of the subject. We must then first ascertain, whether a man its prepared to receive our interpretation of the Bible, before wo help him to read it at all. We must, in point of fact, be clearly convince! that our scholar is as perfect a master of the whole subject as ourselves, before wo proceed to make him dangerous by imparting to hall the slightest elementary knowledge of it. If, however, any man now living has any doubt that education has a general tendency to improve and exalt the minds of men, bad or good, thee such a roan has no busi ness in educational meetings at all. He has no common ground on which to work with others. He is a mere obstruction—all the more dangerous, to uso'Dr. M'Neile's style of argument,—if he possess anything which sounds like eloquence, and startles the ignorant into submission. Christianity, Dr. M'Neile declares, is treated with con tempt .when it is omitted from a scholastic examination. Would we not he asks, think geometry unjustly treated if it were omitted ? How people are to be examined in "Chris tianity," it i s not easy to understand, There are some attributes of Christianity in which it is possible 50M0 very eloquent controversial divines might scarcely come out of an examination with much honour. But we will again swum; this to mean the leading doctrines on which Chris tian sects agree or differ ; and that the same meaning is conveyed by a very singular and somewhat ludicrous phrase used by Dr. M'Neile, when he talks of examin ing into a student's " religious proficiency I" If there could possibly be any parallel between geometry and Christianity, the adoption of a similar course would be right and wise. If it were possible that all sects of men should utterly differ as to the leading principles of geometry ; if wherever two or three were gathered - together, there were two or three conflicting opinions ; if men from the same page and line deduced endlessly different meanings ; if no standard to judge of proficiency could be agreed on, then unquestionably it would be wise and well that geometry should be left to each man to study for himself, and the definite advantages of a general scheme of examinaticn should not be utterly destroyed by its forced in , roduction. We should do this, not because we desired to treat geometry with contempt, but because we desired to obtain certain positive advan tages in other branches of study which we could not have if we insisted on introducing into a general scheme a sub ject on which no two classes could work in harmony, or eompete on equal ground, We should omit geometry because by its iranduction we should not be advancing the study of geometry, while we should be absolutely impeding the common advancement of every other branch of knowledge. We are for omitting examination in Christian doctrine from this scheme, because, in the fi st in3tanca, wa cannot agree as to whit Christian doctrine is ; and, in the next, because we do not think a catechetical examination any test whatever of the influence which the teachings of Christ exercise over the heart and the lire of a studen t " Have we the Rector here ? ' vehemently demands Dr. M•Neile• " Have we Hiran here ?" ask ancient Pistol, with a similarly obsc u r e an d appalling effect on the aerve3 of his audience. Do we dare to decide any ques tion without the consent of the Rector ? One feels sorry to hear the name of so toleran , , unasumii , g, and Christian like a genileman al the Rev. Mr. Campbell, thus voci ferated to Fears timid people out of their right ofjudgment. Bat, if a Liverpool assembly were to decid e no quest i on without waiting the consent of their Rector, one cannot see what advantage we obtain by being freed from the control of a cardinal or a parish priest. Ido not believe any ma n in Liverpool wculd less desire to hear his name used for any such purpose than the Rev. Rector Campbell. Sir I am not a very enthue . astic admirer of the Rev. Hugh Algeile ; even his declamation I have heard somea hat too often. The starts, the pauses, the deep tragic tones, the balanced alternations of vehemence and solemn .lowness ; rather lose their power when one gate so used to the arrangement that he can antieip,te all the suceessive changes of intonation and gesture. But that he has influence of no common order over many of the ZtTT CLOTHING MADE WITH G,t EAT T 1 S rE, at LEWIS and COMPANY'S, Ranelagh-dre3t. THE N ORTHERN TIMES. LIVERPOOL, MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1857 public of Liverpool, it would be idle to doubt. I therefore hope that the people will look to the true question which is to be placed at issue, that the challenge given may be fairly taken up, and that the decision of Liverpool, affecting as it will little more than the character of Liver pool alone, will be explicit and emphatic.—l am, &c., NELISTER. REV. JOHN MACNAUGHT IN REPLY TO THE REV. J. K. GLAZEBROOK. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN TINES. Sir,—ln my last letter I reminded Mr. Glaze brook that, although ho and I differed in opinion, I was still, like himself in position, a clergyman of the Church of England. By ingeniously altering the punctuation of this, my reminder, Mr. Glaze brook represents me as "confessing" myself to be "not in opinion a clergyman of the Established Church of England." Of course, sir, I have made no such confession. Of ourse, Mr. Glazebrook quite understands that my reminder was the very opposite of that which he represents it as having been. His misrepresentation of my words is as complete as possible ; but, I presume, it is made in sport and for amusement, and not as a wilful statement of untruth. I must, however, even on this view of the case, most respectfully and gravely protest against Mr. Glazebrook's finding his amusement in the perversion of a brother clergyman's serious and publio avowal of plain truth. Mr. Glazebrook is at great pains to show that I hold some " Socinian principles." No doubt, Mr. Glazebrook and I both hold some Socinian prin ciples, and some Roman Catholic principles, and some principles in common with every sect 'under the sun, for all men are alike in some respects. This is our heavenly Father's great way of re minding us that we are all brothers, and that, after all, our .broad fellowship of humanity is grander than any narrow Sectarianism. Now, suppose I were to remind Mr. Glazebrook that he holds cer tain principles in common with the Beohuanas of South Africa, and were, therefore, to accuse him of being culpably like those people—or suppose I were uncharitably to insist that Mr. Glazebrook is verging upon Mormonism, because he holds some principles in common with the followers of Joe Smith—or suppose I were to urge, in spite of Mr. Glazebrook's denials and remonstrances, that he is, at heart, a Roman Catholic, because he agrees r with the Church of Rome in many most important princi. ples, how unjust and absurd would Mr. Glazebrook hold such charges against himself to be I Yet, I most respectfully submit that Mr, Glazebrook blames me quite as unjustly for holding some prin ciples in common with the Socinians. It would, as Mr. Glazebrook well knows, be quite easy to represent any man as belonging to any, or to all, the sects in this manner. Nay, by an argument, similar to that which Mr. Glazebrook urges against me, he himself might be shown to be one of those very Socinians whom he seems so much to dread. Once more, however, I beg to assure Mr. Glazebrook that, beyond knowing the so called Socinians to be a very excellent and much maligned body of Christians, I have nothing to do with them ; and, moreover, I would suggest that my holding, or not holding, some principles in common with the Socinians, has nothing to do with the fast that the Sacred . Writings of the Bible are fallible or marked by the colours of the imperfect human minds through which their stream has flowed io us. It is not a little curious that Mr. Glazebrook is nna of th. ni a a , x7l - ti,=.l) niA4 mistaken ens ewith holding in common with the Socinians. He says, that I " openly deny the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures." This is the very opposite of the opinion which I have so frequently avowed. Instead of " denying," I assert and maintain the plenary Inspiration of Scripture, that is, I recognise the Spirit of God as having influence(' the sacred writers in the entire compass of their work. It is Mr. Glazebrook him self who says that the language of a part of St. John's Gospel "plainly limits the teaching of the Spirit to a particular class of truths." If this be not " denying" the plenary or entire Inspiration of the Bible, I know not what meaning Mr. Glazebrook's words can be supposed to bear. So, then, it i>i not I alone who hold "Socinian principles," for here is what Mr. Glazebrook calls a Socinian principle which I deny and which Mr. Glazebrook advocates. I am glad to find that Mr. Glazebrook does not intend to charge every man who differs from with being " a Socinian.'' Although Mr. Glaze brook wrote (November 27, 1857) of Professor Williams as having " dug a deep, large, and dan gerous pitfall ;" though Mr. G. wrote of my friend Dr. Williams's " snare and pitfall ;" though he wrote of a " pitfall provided by Mr. Williams;" and, further, wrote that he had escaped this pitfall by reason of " a rooted distrust of Socinians ;" yet, I am glad to find Mr. Glazebrook did not intend to charge Professor Williams with being a Socinian. I say I am glad of this, not only because it is just towards the reverend Professor, but also because it encourages me to hope that Mr. Glazebrook, when he shall have read my book on Inspiration, and shall have also read Dr. 'Williams's works, such as " Rational Godliness," " Lampeter Theology," " Christianity and liinduisni," &c , will acquit me, too, of heresy, and will see that the orthodox Dr. Williams and myself are agreed on most points connected with the subject of Inspiration. As to John xvii., 17, " Thy Word is Truth," your readers, sir, must judge betwixt Mr. Glazebrook and myself. My opponent asserts that this text settles the debate iu his favour, inasmuch as he declares it to be equivalent in meaning to the words, " The Bible is infallible." I reply that to say a book is true, or is truth, is one thing, and to say that a book is free from all error, or is infallible, is quite another thing. We all believe Livingstone's South Africa to be truth ; but surely no man believes it to be infallible. Similirly, though in a far higher sphere, Mr. G. an I I both believe the Bible to be "truth ;" but I maintain that the Bible is very far from being infallible, because, as a matter of fact, there are many obvious mistakes in the Bible. Thus, oven if Mr, G had shown, or could show, that " thy word," in John, xvii. 17, meant the Bible, he would only eFe.a.blish—what. in effect, I am far indeed from denying—that, with all its errors, the Bible is said by Jesus to be " truth," not that it is said to be infallible. But the fact is, that our Lord here speaks, not of the Bible, but of "thy (i.e. God's) word:" and that "God's word" is not hero or else where, in Scripture, synonymous with " the Bible," is stated by Professor Williams thus" nowhere in Holy Scripture, is the term, ' word of God' mad e an equivalent or synonym for the Bible." The same truth is stated thus by Dr. 011ivaut, the pre_ sent Biehop of Llandaff, " That the phrase, ' word • of God,' in the New Testament, m e a ns not the volume of written Scripture, but the doctrine of divine revelation taught in Holy ScEpture, can scarcely be doubted by any competent critic" By reference to John, xvii. 14, xiv. 23, &c , and ail. 48, &e , we have have already seen that the Saviour Himself declares what He means by " Thy word" in John, xvii. 17; and that meaning is not the Bible, but the words, or sayings, or teach ing°, (Logoi) which the Father had given or corn. mended the Son to speak: This point in our At LEWIS & rOMPANY'S, Romelagh-street. BOYS era CLOTHED from the Agoa of Six to TwontyYeara. argument I take to be quite settled, and I think your readers will agree with me. If Mr. Glaze brook should re-open this question I shall at once propose that we refer it to the arbitrament of Drs. 011ivant and Williams themselves, or of any two other learned men whom we may agree to name. As to the other p3int in dispute, betwixt Mr. Glazebrook and myself—viz., the superiority which I assert for Human Reason over every other rule of faith—l have asked Mr. Glazebrook to tell us what appeal there is betwixt the decisions of reason's private judgment and the tribunal of God in the Day of Judgment, and if there be no appeal higher than that of human reason, except to the bar of the Almighty, then I submit that my case will, in this part of it, be established, for it will appear that there is on earth nothing higher than , or so high as human reason, which is tantamount to saying, that human reason is superior to every rule of faith. Mr. Glazabrook informs us, as part of his answer to my argument, (of Nov. 30) that " the law is superior to a judge within his appointed circuit." I never asked any question about a judge's circuit, but about his proper "functions" and his "court." However, very likely, Mr- Glazebrook and I mean the same thing by our different words, and, if so, the employment of various terms is not important. Mr. Glazebrook's assertion that "Law is sups. rior to a judge," is hardly correct, if Mr. G. means by " law " the dead printed mass which is some times called "law." Over that " law " the judge is so superior that he selects that statute, or that rule of common law which he judges applicable. He expounds what he judges to be the meaning of that statute or that rule. It is by the living word of his judgment pronounced that that dead law is created into an actual and effective sentence. So far a judge is superior to the dead letter of any law. But, is another sense, Mr. Glazebrocek's assertion is quite correct—viz., if " law" be regarded as the sanctioned record of the decisions arrived at by the Human Reason of those who framed the law, and who appointed the judge to be their administrator or representative, superior to all in his proper functions, and in his own court, but subjeet, when straying from those functions, and out of his own - court, to an appeal to the superior judgment of those who made the law, and who are its sovereign or supreme administrators. In this sense, " the law," as a record of the nation's so vereign wisdom, is superior to the judge ; and for this very reason, I showed, my last letter, that Mr. Glazebrook's Assize Judge was not an adequate illustration of the high func tion of Human Reason. From the sentence of man's highest judgments it is the Law of God that each man hath, within himself, a court of higher appeal. If the murderer hath been erroneously acquitted, conscience, a faculty or a function of Human Reason, doth rack the guilty one ; land its sovereign condemnation is ever heard above the ermined judge's mistaken acquittal. So, if the innocent have been condemned, the superior judg ment of the mind, conscious of its integrity, can rob the sentence of well-nigli all its bitterness. Surely, I worked out this argument in my last letter, which Mr. Glazebrook blames for not being more " laboured ; " and yet Mr. Glazebrook does not grapple with this question of the earthly supremacy of Human Reason as a judge above all judges, except God alone. The only argument, at all bearing on this point, which Mr. G. brings forth in his letter of this morning, is his quotation from the great Chillingworth, and the inference, apparently intended to be drawn from this quota tion is, that the Bible being the express or infallible Word of God, is higher than Human Reason, just as " the Law" is higher than a judge. Part of the fallacy in this argument is that it assumes what Mr. Glazebrook has yet to prove, and what I distinctly deny, viz., that the Bible is the express or infallible words of God. How, I ask Mr. G., do you know that the Bible is superior to human reason ? Be cause, replies Mr. Glazebrook, Mr. Chillingworth wrote that, whatever is in the Bible is that which "God hath said," and, of course, that which " God hath said," or God's express and infallible words, must be above every human thought. But, then, hath God spoken or said the express words of the Bible so that they are infallible? This is just the ques tion that I had hoped Mr. Glazebrook would, by pea. vrn _ course, "however, my Reverend opponent assumes this point, and occupies time and space in discus sing my orthodoxy, or the contrary, e. g. Mr. G. asks if I told the Home-ousion ? Of course, I told the Homo-ousion, or oneness of substance betwixt the Father and the Son. If not, how could I repeat the Nicene Creed? I suspect, however, that it would imperil the scholarship and the orthodoxy of many a one—of course I do not mean such an one as Mr. Glazebrook--if he were called upon to explain What is meant by onenesss of substance with a Being who is (Article I.) " without body, parts, or missions ;" and who, as to His essence, dwelleth i 4 light which no man can approach 'unto." This, however, by the way and merely to defend myself from one of the numerous darts with which Mr. Glazebrook has thought proper to assail me. Now, sir, I think my case for the superiority of reason over all rules of faith is, in its general bear ings, pretty well before the public. In my last letter, and in this, I have advanced an argument on this subject which is, so far, untouched by Mr. Glazebrook. I need not, therefore, repeat or dwell on the more abstract and philosophical aspects of the question ; but I shall conclude this letter by submitting to your readers a simple case, in the way of illustration. We are in possession of the Bible, which we believe to be ( or t o con t a i n ) th e Word (or teaching) of God. Now, suppose we find in the Bible (1 Tim., ii. 4) such a very simple statement as this—" Who (i. e. God) will have all men to be saved " I wish to know how I am to ascertain the right meaning of this apparently most easy text ? The more I study the text, the more various do I find are the meanings which have been attached, and are still attached, to its words. Take, first, the words " to be saved," and ascertain their meaning :- 1. To be, after all the cares and sins of this world, rescued from hell-fire in the world to comet 2. go be among those who shall escape destruc tion at the end of the world. 3. To be rescued from sin now, and so, and only so, by the mercy of God, to escape the misery and remorse which always follow sin, as the effee follows from the cause. Which of these three meanings] is truly taught in the text ? Then, take next, the words " will have." 1. Do they imply that God is determined, and that His Nvill in the matter cannot be resisted, but men must be saved ? 2. Do they imply that the Divine wish is for our salvation, and that it will be our foolish sin to thwart that wish, as we can if we so choose? Which of these two different instructions are we to gather from this portion of the text? Or, again, take the apparently unmistakeable words, " all men," and inquire what the learned and the pious say is their signification ? 1. Do they denote 'all the elect only, as not a few Christians say, and may they mean that the reader is not one whom God wishes to be saved ? 2. Do they denote all who hear of the Gospel only, as some say ? 3. Do they denote all, and only all, who, without being foredoomed by an irresistible decree of election, accept the Gospel when they hear it? 4. Do they mean the utmost that they can mean —viz.. that God is beneficent to all, and wishes all men, in all countries, to be good and consequently happy ? filch of these four significations am I to attach to this part of the text ? Or, yet again, who is the " God" referred to 1. 13 God, as some men terribly seem to imply, a dreadful Being, who requires blood before ho can bo placated ? 2. Or, is Ho Love, and did He, out of His love, and in manifestation of that love, Himself send forth the Only-begotten, to seek and to save the wandering pradigals ? Which of all these possible—nay, actual—inter pretations of one simple verse am I to adopt ? Or, rather, which of all their manifold combinations shall I adopt? Who will toll me ? Who will guide me 4 Does any. man say, " Hear the Church BOY', CLOTHING MADE WITH GREAT TASTE AT LEWIS sad COMPANY'S, Ranelsgh-street. interpretation ? " How shall T decide which, among so many claimants, is the Church? When I have got what I suppose to be the Church , what member.or part of the Church is to be my guide ? One bishop says one thing—another bishop con troverts it. One Pope contradicts another ; one council opposes another ; one expositor contra dicts another. Assuredly, the question—which is the Church ? or which is the highest authority in the Church? is more difficult than even the bewil. dering inquiry, What is the meaning of 1 Tim., ii. 4 ? These are the questions amidst which, as a matter of -truth and fact, we all are living. How shall we decide them ? The Bible itself increases their number. Will Mr. Glazebrook tell us to what, except to a devout and prayerful exercise of our own human reason, we can resort in this position of affairs ? And if reason be, indeed, the supreme earthly judge of what is scripture and what is truth, then what rule of faith can there be over which reason is not supreme? If the Bible can thus only suggest various thoughts for reason to compare, and judge, and reject or else accept, say I not truly that human reason is, bi God, made higher than any written book ; yea, higher than the Bible itself ? So well and wisely did the Apostle exhort (1 Cor. xiv. 20) that we should "not be children in understand ing ;THIS PRAM, in our minds); howbeit,in malice be ye children, but in understanding (in yourkninds) be men," or be perfect. I hope, sir, Mr. Glazebrook, and we all, may learn to think more highly and more truly of the mind and reason God has given us.—Yours truly, JOHN MACNATIGAT. Everton, Dec. 4, 1857. THE BANK CHARTER ACT. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN TIMES. Sir,—ln your leading columns, to-day, I find the following : Mr. Macfie, for instance, in accounting for the con temptible failure of the Bank Charter Act, and the Bill of 1819, says :—" No doubt there had been over-trading," and Mr. Aikin assures us, with great solemnity, that " Panics have their origin in commercial imprudence, and not in legislative enactments." But we will take the leading articles of import which tell most heavily on our reserves of bullion—breadstuffs, cotton, silk, wool, sugar, tea, coffee, indigo and other dye-stuffs. and timber —and we would ask those gentlemen if there has been any " over-trading" in any one of those commodities within the last three years? _ _ In the above quotation there is, first, an inquiry, which I answer:—Markets may not, at any time, in late years, have been over-supplied ; stocks may not now bo excessive—indeed, the very reverse may be the case—and yet individual merchants may have grossly over- 4 zaded ; that is, they may have been doing business to an extent not warranted by their capital. We all know that not a few firms have thus overstepped the bounds of prudence, safety. and fair trade. I have no doubt the existence and effects of this grave commercial error have aggravated the crisis. But, secondly, you assume that I blamed this over trading for the " failure of the Bank Charter Act and the Bill of 1819." What I did say at the meeting of the Chamber of Commerce referred to was, that, granted there has been over trading, yet I apprehended the imperfect working of the Bank Act of 1841 would have been made manifest by a like crisis or " fix," altogether independently of that aggravation. And I stated that my object in rising was, in some degree to meet or supplement the observations of a previous speaker, to whose opinions this community always pay respect, which, I feared, miglat be too strongly interpreted by out-and-out supporters of that act (if any there be) as indications in its favour. Without entering on the general question, whi c h / could not venture to do, Icontented myself with ad verting to the fact that the late run on Scotch Banks —as, indeed, a run on banks is generally —was in its main and most dangerous features a withdrawal of deposits, and not a demand for payment of notes, and thence, contending that a great defect in the act is this—that, whereas, stringent and hitherto succes ful provision has been made to secure convertibility into gold for the latter—the notes—no correspond ing or adequate care has been taken to so protect the former—the deposits, [I look on both liabilities transferable receipts for deposits], and I remarked that a national bank or depot, for custody of the precious metals, ought to be always as able and ready to give gold to the bankers and others when they present their deposit receipts or cheques, as a public warehouse keeper is to deliver produce to the holder of a produce warrant. Practically, this defect seems to correspond to what writers on the bank management object to as letting the reserve fall too low. While I may be excused for thus answering your appeal, I hope public discussions of these subjects will be left to others more able, and no further can made, even by the Editor of the NORTHERN TIMES, on, Sir, your very obedient servant, R. A. M. Liverpool, 4th Dec., 1857. THE MONETARY CRISIS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN TIMES. Sir,—ltis amusing to listen to the passing opinions of individuals in one's daily intercourse, that wo are recovering from the effect of the present Mone tary Crisis ; that on the turn of the year we shall have attained to a healthy condition, and in the spring we shall have a heavy business, and money will be very cheap. No doubt good times will in time return to us ; but before closing our books as to past transactions, the public are interested in the question, on what condition business is to be resumed ? and it would be well if some mercantile men would make a record of the past and present for their future guidance. The cause has been manifestly proved to an over anxiety to get " rich i n a day," and too much ready assistance by Joint Stock Banks—without the latter the former could not be •'.one—and therefore to the Banking system I may be attributed much of the present misery. No man is justified in trading beyond a certain credit due to the just and legitimate amount of his capital ; and to satisfy himself as to this amount of credit, is to take into consideration at all times, if, when credit becomes due, whether his assets will meet his obligations, and why should it not be the ease ? No man has a right—and, in short, it is dishonesty itself, and of the worst possible description—to go beyond these reasonable bounds. It is not honest in a man starting the world with comparatively no means, and, by force of circumstances, at once to thrust himself before the public as a " princely merchant," sustaining that character by large appearances. It is against the spirit of the law ; it is nothing better than contract ing debts by false pretence. When such a man suspends payment, the very fact of the magnitude of his operations, and the effect his suspension may have upon others, screen him from that strict public investigation of his conduct and management of his business affairs which should in all eases take place. In some quiet nook his affairs are wound up by what is called " under private inspection," which, in practice, means himself. Within two or three months he receives from his inspectors a final release, and this, generally, before a distribution can be made of his meagre assets ; he is a free man; the game he has played, if successful, the benefit would have been his own ; if loss accrued, it falls to his creditors. It may probably be asked, how does such a man manage so far to gull the public ? It has been answered over and again within the last six weeks—by the Joint Stock Banking system; and it has been more especially shown by those banks which have broken up. Like their ambitious and speculative customer, thole banks wish periodically to make (if not to show) great gains for their shareholders, in the shape of hand some dividends. At their ,meetings a flourishing report is read, the dividend declared, and thanks follow, as of course, to the manager. Whilst a large dividend is declared, the internal condition of the concern is not inquired into, and the risks run to obtain the profits. In short, it requires an exceedingly strong and stubborn minded man, in the face of a handsome dividend, and a satisfied proptietory, to put any question. The ambitious and speculative trader, being more adventurous, BOYS' CLOTHING MADE WITH GREAT TARTE, tiLEWie and COMPANY'S, Ranglagh-street has had a great advantage over the quiet-going honest dealer, starting with his limited but solid capital, who wishes gradually to improve his circumstances, and in doing so estimates his bank commission. The former character should be classed with our Brother Jonathan, and designated " a fast man." He keeps pace with the banking system ; and large dividend commissions, whilst he has ready accommodation, aro never thought of. In time he becomes a welcome visitor at the bank parlour—a gentleman of consequence. A friendly and confidential feeling springs up between him and the managers ;—accommodation goes on—it aggregates and increases. The bank then changes place with the customer. He not only asks, but demands accommodation, or threatens to suspend—the Bank is then powerless ; to him is committed the..direction ; the Bank, in quiet self defenee—an I here the mischief towards innocent parties arises to be felt—holds him up, getting what they can, and watching for an opportunity still further to reduce their claim. The bubble bursts when large dividends are not forthcoming; the crisis comes, and then, we, the public, are simply told, " this great man is in with his Bank for a good round sum." Another move then comes on the card ; so serious will be his downfall, that for the sake of others involved, there must be no public investigation, but a private arrangement. This is by no means en exaggerated statement ; daily amounts have proved it to be true. Now to the remedy ; let there be no disguise in the winding-up of the dealings of these adven turous gentlemen. Insist on public investigation, and do not screen the Bankers who have so abused the confidence of their shareholders. No honest man, who may have been drawn into the meshes of such Bankers and their customer, need be afraid of tha consequences to himself personally. That as regards Banks, insist upon a law that in all cases of suspension, as public institutions, they shall undergo the.ordeal of being wound up by legal authority having publicity ; and, further, as they possess large means of doing injury to inno sent parties, such as widows and orphans, let their conduct, where culpable mismanagement has taken place, be visited with suitable punishment. This will go far to cure the present wholesale distrust, and will tend to prevent the recurrence of the weighty mercantile failures which have periodically taken place. It will bring bankers to the know ledge and practice of it, that the well-being of their system does not depend upon taking the great adventurous speculator by the hand, but that the true system is to give limited credit by way of advancement to the honest capitalist, whose ope rations may not be so large. Business will then be spread over a greater area, and credit risk will be reduced, creating,a more healthy condition in our mercantile system ; and, in the long-run, it will produce, even to the shareholde r s o f banks, remunerative dividends, without the risk of losing their " all." A. B. 2nd December. 1857. MISS JESSIE MERITON WHITE. We have received a lengthened narrative of the treatment received by Miss White at the hands of the Sardinian authorities. After detailing the par ticulars of her arrest with which our readers are already acquainted, she says : My next step was to telegraph to the British ambas sador, stating my position and my resolution to insist on a trial. I also sent a despatelt to Avocato Brefferio, M.P., requesting him to defend noc. Brofferio telegraphed as follows :—" I shall consider myself honoured to defend you. This evening I will speak with the Minister —Yours, ora e sempre, ANGELO BROFFERIO." Saturday evening I received the following letter : " British Consulate,TGenoa,:4th July, 1857. Madame,--In accordance with instructions which I have just received by telegraph from Sir James Hudson, I have to acquaint you that he con-iders that your pro ceedings in this country have had for their object the setting of the King's authority at defiance, and the sub version of the law and public peace; and that he, there fore, declines to take any steps in your behalf." "Ihave the honour„to be, Madame, your most obedient servant, " YEATS BROWN, H.M. Consul. " To Miss Jessie White, Genoa." Sunday evening, at half-'ast eleven, after two days' and two night's detention in the house, surrounded by an armed force, varying in number from twelve to twenty, a RiTiaL e Et b Eßs t i l l/gaP r ifFoti4 fiVs" "ICU tgareat I was charged with the crime provided for by the 185th article of the penal code :—" Any attempt or conspiracy, whose object is to change or destroy the form of govern ment, or to excite the subjects, or inhabitants, to arm themselves against the sovereign authority is punished by death." So, escorted by the carahinieri, in plain clothes, and followed by those who had formed the body guard in the house, I entered the prison of St. Andrea, at mid night, on the sth of July. The individuals arrested for the plans of the 29th June amounted to about one hundred. Thrust into the dark and humid cells of St Andrea, among thieves and assassins, the political prisoners were not even allowed to take exercise in the corridors or courtyard allotted to these latter. The greater number of them being working men, they were unable to avail themselves of the permission to eat at their own expense, and thus were compelled to subsist as best they could on the Go. vernment rations. These consist of twenty-eight ounces of black bread and a basin of soup, made of water, beans, and a sort of paste, which is said to be cooked with oil ; but as an ounce of oil only is allotted to five persons, instead of being boiled with the soup. it is poured in cold at the last moment, and imparts a flavour and odour of which all who have once partaken of this soup must retain a life-long recollection. On Sundays and holidays, this mess is replaced by rice, and in summer a few drops of vinegar are poured into the water. A sack of straw forms the prisoner's bed. Let a comparison be made between the Sardinian and the Papal prisons, even in the time of Gregory XVI., and it will be found that the treatment of political prisoners in the latter, as far as food and lodging is concerned, is infinitely superior; and it is proved from the statistics that the prisons of Sardinia send a far larger contingent to the hospitals than do those of the Papal States. The position of the political prisoners here may be considerably ameliorated or aggravated by the Director and his subalterns. I shall ever retain a vivid remernberance of the courtesy and kindness which I received from Signor Colombo, the Director of the prisons, and from his wife during the whole time of my residence in St. Andrea. Alloting me a large airy room, which I furnished at pleasure near his own office, I was entirely separated from the other pri soners, male and female. A Pilfer and jailoress, were ap pointed to guard me, and while neither of them ever failed in their duty or their vigilance, I never received a harsh disrespectful word from either. During the first ten weeks of my imprisonment, I was not allowed to see a single friepd. All books, materials, and flowers received from without, were scrupulously examined, and even the permission to write my friends through the authorities, was a- mere farce, as although I wrote several times a week to my father, "he remained sometimes a month without receiving a single letter. After describing her various examinations before the magistrates, which have been already published and which ultimately resulted in her release, as there were no grounds of accusation against her, she concludes as follows Such, sir, is a brief statement of the facts that concern me personally during the last four months. I abstain from speaking of my examinations, or of any persons or matters connected with the trial, until that trial shall have taken place. My object in addressing you, is to expose the con duct of the British Consul and British ambassador towards a British subject furnish( d with a Foreign Office passport ; to expose their system, I might say, for both my Italian and English friends in Genoa told me, on hearing of my arrest, " Hope for nothing from the British Embassy; if you had an American passport the case would be different." Setting aside the illegal and eccentric acts of Signor Galleano, I, who have long since ceased to expect the Piedmoutese Government to respect the statute, or to regard, save with fear and dislike, all persons interested in the national Italian cause, cannot complain of the treatment I have personally received at their hands, con sidering that they were authorised to do their worst by the conduct of the British Embassy, and also by Sir James Hudson's gentlemanly expression, " Fate quel the voleto co❑ questa pettegola:" (He would have been nearer the mark, by the way, had he said, Fate quel the potete ) Be it remembered that I did not ask for protection against the laws of Sardinia, but merely requested the British authorities to insist on my being tried and judged by those laws; that by reducing the Government to the alternative of dragging me to the frontier by force or according to my demand, I am, after four months' imprisonment, released, cleared from any imputation, and free to remain in Genoa as lone as its suits me so to do ; therefore, it is clear that Sir eHudson had no grounds, either moral or material, for considering that my pro ceedings in this country had for their object the reason designated in the letter of Mr. Yeats Brown, and hence they can furnish no justification for having sanctioned the violation of my safe passport. Whether the illegalities committed by the British authorities furnish cause for legal proceeding I am now taking steps to ascertain; that the tree press of Britain will pees a just sentence on such conduct I have the fullest confidence.—Zonclon Paper. At LEWIS & OHPANTS, Ranelagh-street, BOYS are CLOTHED from the Agee of Silk Tlreaty Years, COURT OF CIIEEN'S BENCH.-DEC. 2. TRILL FOR LIBEL. LEWIS v. LEVS.—Mr. O'Malley, Q. C.. Mr. Petersdeefne and Mr. Laxton appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. En, James, Q.C., and Mr Serjeant Ballantine for the defellhe ant. The plaintiff in this action, Edward Lewis, Wa s L ed manager of a loan society called the Traders ter, Mechanics Loan Society, carried on at No. 16, F et fs lane, but which society consisted only of the plain t; sister, a Mrs. Foster. The defendant, Joseph Moses Levi was the proprietor of a newspaper called the P “ Telegraph, published in the Strand ; and the present ae . t r i r r was brought against him by the plaintiff to re c r u ee e damages for several libels published in that ja ° imputing to the plaintiff that he had been guilty of W e „ r d and corrupt perjury. The defendant pleaded under Campbell's Act, that the articles in question werlee correct, and true reports of proceedings which had bass, place in a court of justice. It appeared that a hire' lot who was seated to he the wife of the town clerk of 9 ?ti• but was divorced from him by a decree of the Eeclestie; cal Court, had obtained a loan from the plaintiffs ° w ite and, according to the plaintiff's case, she, together ,0 an attorney's clerk, named John Edward Collet t, ;s. united to deceive the plaintiff. by representing tha t „ rc of Bass was a widow lady, and that in this way, a a "Tee thirty pounds had been obtained from the so ciety. o f plaintiff made a charge against Collett, at GuildbatL ys , obtaining money by false pretences, and swore that an d t° 'l s t Bass made a declaration that she was a widow, OS the defendant Collett had confirmed the statement' g od this occasion, Mrs. Bass was examined as a witness, bet deposed that she made the declaration withou t s he attention being called to that part which stated th ef t , was a widow ; and she added, that she had tol e plaintiff she was a married woman, the wife of the t tr os clerk of Dover Upon this evidence the mar ee le , dismisse4 the charge against Collett, and, on the ar do r cation of Collett's counsel, he granted a sum mons-fo r a /0 plaintiff to answer a charge of perjury. When this orb. came on to be heard, Mrs. Bass repeated the eridene a o st had given on the previous occasion. In giving an a e ce j o ly, of this hearing, in the Daily Telegraph of th e 4th ote tee under the heading "Wilful and Corrupt Perjury ' but defendant gave the substance of Mrs. Bass' s ev ideni c e, he omitted to give Mrs. Base's cross-examination• told it was now contended, on the part of the plaintiff. " set have entirely destroyed the weight of her evidenc e ,' the so would have cleared the plaintiff's character lon estimation of the public. The most material parts a v e cross-examination, as afterwards put in by the defenoel were that she (Mrs. Bass) had on various oec,1 0 11! obtained goods from tradesmen, and on as many as she occasions, when sued, had Ideeded her coverturc also stated that she was living in the same hout o lea Collett, and was often called Mrs. Collett, but nee living with him as his wife. . The report conclud e t o stating that the magistrate (Mr. Ald. Rose) remand e d o bee plaintiff for further evidence. In a subsequent nc ee 0 of the Telegraph of the 18th of July, there W ee report which stated that the plaintiff ha d ee er a rendered, in discharge of his recognisances to an'" s en, charge of perjury ; and it concluded with this P 5 5 10 which the plaintiff complained of as amounting 410 imputation that he was guilty of the charge magistrate dismissed the summons, there not behl e till cient evidence to secure a conviction." The plan' o e, case was proved by putting in the several article) s tet plained of and proving that a bill was exposed in I r s : e g to the defendant's office, containing among other na" sea catch the eye the following ;—"Wilful'and corrupt r 1 by the manager of a loan office." Mr. James sna w ee e-PY, that it was the duty of the plaintiff to prove his °roc putting in the cross-examination of Mrs. Bass ; but n ele. Campbell ruled that as the plaintiff had proved t hu s lication of criminatory matter, the defendant neas t ,Le.P. his plea. Mr. James then called Mr. Martin, the Cm" s ee the magistrates' at Guildhall, who producedso read his notes of the evidence given by the various rdeo l ; at the examinations which had been h a d at Ga"...00 3 ' He read the evidence of Mrs. Bass, and the cross• f l e eet nation, as stated above, and his note made o .c e occurred when the summons against the plaintiff Ass dismissed. The latter ran thus—That the sumnl a e es does dismissed because the evidence was " not likely to P'„ ° ,oo , a conviction." Mr. Alderman Rose was all° be and he said he dismissed the charge beea u 'i to a thought " the evidence was not sufficient to lea to conviction." The Aldermrn added that he had re 0 ;0 believe that the witnesses had been kept out of the 0. Mr. James, in summing up his evidence, said it 'Ogee traordinary that a man should bring an action t ° lots dicate his character, and yet should not dare to g e w, the box to be cross-examined. One of the evitjle the whom the Alderman had thought was kept out o way was Gadem, a man in the plaintiff's e mploy,, tr ee learned counsel contended the reports were fair arlo trie. accounts of what had occurred; and as to giving a cross-examination of witnesses, if that were dcf l ee e 'eet would fill the Times. At the most the plaintiff w")(f. entitled to more than one farthing damages. Ab iob O'Malley, in his reply, enlarged npon the frauds, boot vr, the cross-examination of Mrs. Bass showed she bareio in the habit of committing, and complained that, ate that part of her evidence which was calculated to Zo %p e , criminality to the plaintiff had been inserted in thael a the whole of the cross-examination, w hich wea l t" e' O. CA °33 ,are file is summing up the evidence, said the jar> the 101; guardians of the liberty of the press, It Was, ‘t C oa t i importance to protect the press in giving a Is ir " .. . — s t the of what passed in courts of justice ; but it vi Zerilet, same time of the last importance that the r r ia l rY should not be abused, and it would be for the e e • Tee say whether that had been'the case in this instano" question was whether,the three numbers of the Telegaiset contained true and fair accounts of the proceeding s thei the plaintiff Lewis before Mr. Ald. Rose, font ` t . 0 . 1 did the defendant was entitled to a verdict. But i „ H i ° e iett a t contrary, the reports were not fair and bow fide, then; till: would be entitled to a verdict. It was inepossioee'e reports should be given verbatim; that would Iln a ,;tbs privilege delusory. Except in very important es's', etc could not be done, but a reporter should gi ve , abridgment of what to o k pl ace , taking care, without tree tiality, and with reason a bl e care and skill, to g ive 2 a elit el account. With respect to th e fi rst art i c l e, o n tht well e e June, the jury would say whether the heading gt fae, and corrupt perjury " meant anything more than tbto 011 the substance of the charge made. With respec t set of the articles his Lardship observed that reporter should confine himself to a dry statement % I ola: took place, without making comments or drawing c ee - pr; sions, at least in the article which contained the ee n er It would , however, be competent for a journalist toe p ott the conduct of juries, and even of judges ; but ins re gild' his Lordship said, he never wished to see more then, Ale: statement of what took place in court. His Lordship 0,0 he could not approve of the style of the report, i nc , i , r :ott e d e t ' conclusions, instead of stati ng w h at too k place 1:014,0 The report in question was no t i n th e b est sty le : was generally found in the daily papers, in whice' s el e he had leisure to lo o k i n t o th em, hi s L or dship 6 7 e liee:; found very fair and i mpart i a l accounts o f Pre° to for which the public ought to be much indebte d Wa s e r authors of those reports. But, though the reP°oosoo/ not in that style, th e j ury mus t still c de!' d whether it was true. H av i ng ca ll e d t h e attel P 5 11 5 the jury to Alderman Rose's evidence, his Lord of tb there were many case s i n w hi c h h e thought it het bet be pe the parties should not be called as witnesse a ni 'lbt e le thought that in a case like the present !,,,t, e - e i rcig e etb expected that thee plaintiff would be called. uP . ,. ° O "' v ie advised the jury to compare the published eer d .teleigr the notes of the evidence taken by the magieteal e re'ree and so to decide whether the reports in question t ter b ie. and accurate; but if they s h ou ld fi n d t h e i r ve rdineerreelf plaintiff the damages ought t o b e very lincoaeo's "'" The jury retired to cons id er th e i r verd i ct, and - - return into court found for the defendant. The suspension has been announced of MeserE l f ,' Bovet, an old firm in the trade with China. 4 0 01 ) moderate. Difficulties understo o d t o hare beepp` _ n o caused by the late hea v y fall in the silk market . 00 07,0 HAMBURG, Friday. ---The Senate has jug t . d hereff i • another extraordinary conv oca ti on o f the /311`1"tibufgeee for to-morrow, to empower the former to ,1000 Government Discount Institution, w ith 30,Uu" banco capital. ir tsig PARIS, Friday Eveni ng .—Th e journal - 16 ee ° f P . been suspended for tw o mon th s , i n consequeteid bi to ee article which appeared in it yesterday, o , l ge ° g al • Peyrat, on the ref usa l o f C arnot an d Goudel4l, l ',, the oathe prescribed t o members of the Corp s o ,ol o b'ett Ties MEMBER FOll TOTNEsS.-.-OR 'Tuesday ° O4 l Mills, Esq , and the E ar l G.ff or d, t h e lib e ral pit members of Totness, met their constituents in t he , 0 w it ento in that town, for th e p ur p ose o f presen ti n g t: i.e prlia: ,h iiieg account of their conduct i n th e l ast sess i o n Of h ob le a the and of expressing th e i r sen t ments re l at i v e to t „ t ioe ° ,rotr questions 'which ar e lik e ly t o engage the at te b - i g bli 7 0 9 1 L-gislature in the next. Their reception Was opP po • Eying, and showed th a t th e i r con d uct was W arts .7 Tbe the by the entire Liberal party in the borong h ' eec bd„* th e members addressed the meeting in able aP n th, ribst address of Earl Gifford being of considerable le e_,, re s , ir t plea" pa ' l ll coarse of which they reviewed the principa l 0 , 3 12e occupied the attention of Parliament last Ses.iorefoof cussed the probabilities in favour of a 11 ," . . t i0e ° o its being proposed by Lord Palmerston, the aLte r ,h e plod Bank Charter Act, and the Eastern question. l io ting l os o o of his lordship on the two last topics were b " co pe p ro• by originality and fol argumen% At t tieo WWI of the speeches of the hon. members, a resolt.l. f isl val of their conduct, and thanking them for tn" adopted unanimously.— Plymouth Journal' r-- BOYS' CLOTHING MADE WITH GREAT TASTE s" CO +1 PANY'S, RazseJagh-street. NOTICE TO ADVERTISRS' fi ts, Serf 9 tot PERSONS seeking Employmertcigoirve,oolnogri Assistants, Clerks, Apartments, or ° ~frr soci.o bring their wants under the Notice of the Publ ic, :Iwo el Laser he No RTHERN TIMES, which is the most eiticient In of acifertw— n this district. The cash price for thrh sPeci al %, l6ss m4l.4. s reduced to THREEPKIICK for TWENTY n -- Ptzti 11V *41,c ko kt) G.,,,