The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-02-05 00:00:00

However trivial it. may appear in the eyes of Lord
PALMERSTOR, the unpleasant feeling existing in Persia
against this country is the cause of very considerable un-
easiness to many, who believe, it may be erroneously, that it
is in a great degree the result of Russian intrigue, and is only
part of a system which, if not effectually checked, will, sooner
or later, occasion this country great efforts and many sacri-
fices to counteract.

The Parliamentary campaign has now begun in earnest ;
and notices of motion, of varying degrees of interest, have
already been given in both houses. One of considerable im-
portance, in a constitutional point of view, has been given for
discussion in the House of Peers, on the subject of life
peerages, occasioned by the elevation of Baron PARKE as a
peer for life, instead of making out the patent of his nobility
in the usual form. The motion is to be made on Thursday,
by Lord LYNDHURST, who is to state this evening the precise
nature of his motion. Various constitutional authoritiestjaold
the precedent an exceedingly dangerous one ; and altli;ugli
no one offers the slightest opposition to the elevation of the
learned baron—indeed, there seems to be but one opinion as
to the expediency and propriety of that proceeding—very
grave objections are urged in opposition to the Wensleydale
peerage as a life one. The division of the House of Lords into
two bodies—hereditary and life peers—it is felt would be a
dangerous innovation, and one which, if conceded, will open
the way for a wayward Minister to swamp the House by the
creation of numerous life peers : indeed, it is among the cur-
rent rumours of the day that Sir Join{ JERVIS, Chief Justice
of the Common Pleas,is also to be raised to the UpperHouseas
a life peer. Much interest is attached among legal circles to
the discussion. The law lords, it is said, are, with one excep-
tion, opposed to the new creation, on the ground of its
illegality.

Brief as the period has been which has elapsed since the
meeting of Parliament, no small amount of interest has
attached to the proceedings in the House of Commons. Im-
mediately on re-assembling, after the brief adjournment cus-
tomary on the first day of the session, several new members
took their seats, among whom was Sir CHARLES NAPIER, for
Southwark. So soon as the standing orders had been com-
plied with, new writs were issued for a number of places, in-
cluding the University of Cambridge, Edinburgh and Midhurst.
To these writs more than usual interest is attached. The first-
named is expected to involVe a severe contest, and excites
great attention, involving as it does the Parliamentary status
of the Right Hon. Mr. H. S. WALPOLE, one of the best as he
is also one of the most distinguished of the Conservative party.
To enable him to stand for Cambridge, Mr. WALPOLE has
necessarily resigned his seat for Midhurst, where the return of
his friend, Mr. SA.MIIEL WARREN, is considered secure. To
obtain the University seat promises to be an arduous under-
taking, and a severe contest is anticipated. The result is con-
fidently looked forward to by the friends of Mr.WiLPoLn ; but
they do not attempt to disguise that a heavy task and a sharp
conflict are before them. The claims of his opponent, Mr.
DENMAN, son of the late Lord DENMAN, rest chiefly on his
recently-acquired popularity as a scholar of some promise, and
his consequent favour among the resident voters. Political
position he has none, nor has he any foundation to ground his
political pretensions on beyond the ordinary vague profession
of liberal faith and a plentiful crop of promises. On the other
hand, Mr. WALPOLE is known to be a ripe and well-cultured
scholar, an able and judicious lawyer, and a sound practical
statesman. The polling for this election, on which the eyes of
the country are turned, commences on Thursday, and may
' continue for a considerable time. The interest attaching to
the election for the Scotch metropolis is rather that belonging
to the shadows of the past than of particular interest in itself.
It is occasioned, as all the world knows, by the resignation of
his seat by Mr. T. B. MACAULAr, who retires into the quietude
of private and the-sedate luxuries of literary life. The senatorial
chair which he has vacated has become the object of ambition
to two gentlemen, both natives of the city, who, though
brethren in profession, are rivals in renown, who have long
"agreed to differ" on many public and private matters. So far
as present appearances go, Mr. ADAM BLACK, the pet of the
Whigs and Dissenters, seems to have the advantage over his
rival, Sir WILLIAM JORNSTON, who is the idol of the Free
Church party, and who is, moreover, well known to have a
profound knowledge of the art of "circle-sailing," as that is
applied to municipal politics. A third candidate, in the Con-
servative interest, is spoken of for the northern Athens, in the
person of the Hon. T. C. BRUCE, brother to the Earl of ELGIN,
who stood at the last general election, and made a fair show on
the poll.

Conspicious among the extra-legislative displays of the past
week was the great MILNER GIBSON-BRIGHT exhibition,
last Monday night, at Manchester. This brilliant assemblage
was presided over by Mr. G. WILSON, who told the motley
gathering that they had assembled to do honour to the public
services of " one gentleman who was right honourable by
favour of the QUEEN, and of another who was right honourable
by favour of the people ! " and this too in the presence of and
in compliment to a gentleman who, as a Privy Counsellor,
must have sworn to support and maintain the privileges of the
QUEEN. This worthy Privy Counsellor and high-spirited
gentleman offered no rebuke to his "excellent friend," who
had thus wantonly insulted his Sovereign, and sneered at the
dignity and honour she had conferred on so unworthy
a recipient of either. The BRIGHT vagaries of Mr. M.
Ginsow's colleague consisted in a repetition of the old
tricks. Villifying all who differ from him in
opinion—
shaping his facts to fit his case—as a joiner, pares and
alters the piece of wood he has to put into a parti-
cular hole. One matter alone must be borne steadfastly iu
view—whatever JoHN BRIGHT says of himself, or his case,or
his opponent, is ipso facto true, correct, and proper; and so of
all those who agree with him. All who differ from him are
fools, knaves, and liars. At his bidding right becomes wrong ;
black, white ; truth, falsehood; knowledge, ignorance. He is
the only infallible man alive, and his world is peopled by only
two classes, the wise and the good, who implicitly agree with
him—the knaves and fools, who dare, in even the slightest
degree, to differ from him.
While politics and war continue to divide the senatorialand
electoral interests of the realm, the contentions which for sonic
time have shaken the rival thrones set up in Drury-lane and
Covent-garden theatres continues unabated. In this instance,
however, the strife is turned to mutual profit. At Drury-lane,
the great gun trick, by Professor CHARLES MATHEWS, the
Wizard of the S.S.W. by S., continues to fill the house with
shouting and admiring crowds, who nightly applaud to the
echo the clever travesties of Ali DERsow's robustious and some-
what clumsy necromancy. The Covent-garden squib in retort is
a smart dramatic pasquinade, under the title of "What does he
Want ?" in which CHARLES MATHEWS is tellingly caricatured
and happily mimicked by Mr. LEIGH Munnex. The contest of
mimicry between these two rival comedians is cleverly sustained,
and its reward is sensibly perceived at the treasury, the receipts
at which are large, and said to be increasing. A current
rumour has it settled that Her Majesty's Theatre will be
opened this season under the combined government of Messrs.
LUMLEY and- MITCHELL and Herr OTTO, GOLDSCHMIDT, the
Swedish Nightingale resuming her place, it is said, as prima
donna. The rumour, like all rumours, is, of course, well
authenticated, but the individual sponsors for its accuracy are,
it must be confessed, somewhat difficult to find. Still, as it
contains nothing at variance with probability, there may be
truth -in -it. - The Royal Italian Opera company is still in,
course of formation by Mr. GTE, who has secured the services
of Madame GEM. and Signor MARIO. At the opening of this
theatre, among the early novelties, it is understood an Italian
version of VERDI'S Sicilian Vespers will be produced, similar
to that which last year created so great a furore in the musical
world of Paris.

THE SABBATH DEFENCE MEETING.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

SlR,—The editor of a newspaper has, of course, to exercise
considerable discretion in the accepting or rejecting of certain
documents that from time to time find their way into his
letter-box. I picture to myself an editor at his desk, having
just received the postman's morning contribution. A mass of
heterogeneous matter, in the shape of a variety of letters, lie
at his side, and three baskets before him. Then comes "the
tug of war !"—a " Balaklava charge" into the multitudinous
conglomeration of correspondents' cogitations ! Au envelope
is torn open, and the contents hastily " run through ;" it falls
into basket "No. 2" "for further consideration." The next
is twice read, and enters "basket No. 1" "for insertion;
another is looked into, and soon appears in fragments, in
" basket No. 3," the worthy editor exclaiming—" What
stuff !"

'NOW, Sir, the presiding genius at tile " Blue Pill Office"
admitting into
does not appear to me to havd used his discretion aright in
"basket No. 1" a long-winded letter (dated
Jan. 22), and styled by its author " A BLISTER," relative to
the late " Sabbath Defence Meeting" in St. George's-hall.
I shall now quote a few extracts from the said produc-
tion :
" I never before saw so many assembled in one building
wearing white neckcloths, which had a puritanical effect, and
was strongly suggestive of those times when the Pharisee used
to go abroad marked with some distinctive badge."
Mr. B. (as we will call him) is evidently set against the
` vent his spleen" upon
atnon,oyed to find the build-
iSnagh
oa twhe
lml movement,
andnt, andg
iinv
sasa
tmouncche
the clergy, against which body of men (through the whole
length of his letter) he especially directs his attacks. He
stated that they " earn wages on the Sabbath by preaching,"
and that this is " working on the Lord's-day ;" and moreover,
that " they prefer the money to the labour which they expend."
Let Mr. B. remember that " preaching" is- God's own appointed
ordinance, and that he has said, "The labourer is worthy of
Ills reward.

The writer, in the next place, seems to have been annoyed
at the " white cravat gentlemen," and " white chokers" (as
he designates the clergy) appearing in their best coats!
" They appeared to me to be the best clad and best fed in
the assembly. (o doubt tailors consider them their best

customers, for their garments always appeal' to shine, whilst
their hearers often enough are compelled to let theirs become
"seedy." . . • . If the meeting had been weeded of
the "white chokers," of their wives and daughters, of their
hangers-on in the garb of Scripture readers, of deacons, of
.churchwardens, anti:their wives and families, the -Hill would
have been much thinned, and the meeting stripped'of its fine
feathers."

" BUSTER" next advocates the setting up as preachers
men who "work during the week at the hammer, saw,"
&c., and says, "we do not want refined speculations, or
scientifiniseottrses on the Sunday. Plain food is best for us,
and it may be provided at a cheap rate."
Would Mr. B. like to be lectured from the pulpit, Sunday
after Sunday, by his tailor, joiner, or shoemaker I—would
not his "amen" be exchanged for "ne mew' ultra ere-
pidam 1"
8., in proceeding with his letter, abuses preachers right
and left, in "exchanging sermons' for money." " When Dr.
Raffles was first appointed, he had a lower. salary than he re•
ceives now • as he increased in popularity he obtained higher
wages. The same may be said of Dr. M`Neile and others.
. . . These, our blind leaders [very complimentary !] work
on the Sabbath, because they receive money for what they do
on that day. . . . The meeting to my [blistered ?] mind
smelt a good deal of the shop, and, I fear, had no better root
than hypocrisy." [Very charitable, Mr. B.!] He nextwould
lead one to believe that " Mr. Horsfall's forge hammers" are
"not always silent on Sunday," and that 'Mr. Peto employs
workmen in Paris on the Sabbath." ---

"BLISTER," in concluding, Makes the following extraordi-
nary statements :—"Drunkenness is the sin of this nation; and
nowthat an attempt has been made to wipe it off, the old cleri-
cal spirit is with its hand.up against everyman. . . . Every
great reform has been made in spite of the clergy, and by men
moved by a higher feeling than the love of gain. . . Lord
John Russell was moved by the spirit of a noble philanthropy
when he carried the Reform Bill. [! !!] . . . Drunken-
ness will be done away with in a great measure, but not by
the preachers and clergy. They will do their best to hinder
the progress of the good work. [H] They must be made to
stand aside, to make rcom for other men. . . . Seeing
that the speakers were so much affected by inflammation, for
their good lam moved to apply this BLISTER: "*
So ends Mr. B.'s production. Will not even the • Anti-
Sabbath Defence party exclaim, " Save us from our friends !"
Talk of inflammation, why " himself is in a most highly
inflammatory condition ! Let his medical man keep him, by
all means, for the next three weeks, upon a very low diet.
The St. George's Hall meeting has been much too exciting
for his tender constitution ! The " white cravats " haunt
his disturbed brain and his poor mind is evidently blistered
with prejudice against all the preachers of the. present day, and
especially against those who stand boldly forward in defence
of that noble, sacred; and Divine Institution, which (in pro-
portion as it is honoured) tends, and ever will tend, to exalt a
kingdom, whilst the opposite course is sure eventually to end
in degradation and ruin.

TrUsting, Sir, that Mr. B:s future productions upon the
matter in hand (i. e., whilst he continues a victim to prejudice)
will be consigned to the receptacle "number three," I re-
main, your obedient servant, R.
" Blister's" letter appeared in the Liverpool Mercury, of Janu-
ary 22, 1856.

THE IMPORTANCE OF SPEAKING THE
TRUTH in RELIGIOUS CONTROVE.RSY..
A LETTER PROM THE REV. DR. BLYLEE, PRINCIPAL OF ST.
AIDAN'S TELEOLOGICAL COLLEGE, BIRKENHEAD, TO THE
REV. EDWARD NANGLE, EDITOR OP THE ACHILL MIS-
SIONARY HERALD.

MY DEAR BROTRER,—I read with much pain your stria-
tures ou my little tracts upon certain proposed changes in our
Liturgy. _ _

The pain and grief which your observations caused arose
from the sad exhibition of how far one Christian can go in
falsely accusing his brother. You have written respecting me
that which, so far as I am concerned, I am thankful to say, is
utterly contrary to the truth. You accuse me of Romanizing
tendencies, which, in my heart, I abhor ; and of ignoring part
of God's Word, although I have written a little treatise on
Verbal Inspiration, asserting and, I hope, proving;.that every
word and syllable of the Holy Scriptures is just what God
would have spoken from Heaven, had He employed no human
instrumentality. _

In endeavouring to make your statements appear to be
true, you suppress those parts• of what I have written which
would have prevented the possibility of your readers accepting
those statements. Your first charge against me is, that I have
rapidly gone down the inclined plane towards Romanism in
my statements respecting. the Christian. priesthood.
Now, what are the facts ?

In the year 1836, I was engaged with you in the active
duties of the Achill Mission. Z then wrote a little book, en-
titled, " The Institutions of the Church of England one of
Divine authority." Every line• of that book you heard read
as it was going through your own printing•press, and you
made no objection to a single statement in it.
That little work contains precisely the same views of the
analogy between the Levitical priesthood and the Christian
ministry which my recent tracts-advocate.

As we lived next door to each, other for nearly three gears,
and were in habits of daily intercourse, you were intimately
acquainted with my sentiments.
- With such facts on record, it is no wonder that my heart
felt sad that a minister of Christ should so pervert Christian
morals, to the bitterness of religious controversy, as actually
to print a statement, highly injurious to his brother, which
he knew to be without foundation. Your second charge is
that of Romish and Tractarian principles, because I assert that
the Christian ministry is an exact transcript of the Levitical
priesthood in all its peculiarities. In making this assertion,
you suppress the part of the sentence which would have shown
the true meaning of my words.

My statement is, that " Priesthood has been. strangely con-
founded with mediation, so that, to most minds, to speak of
sacerdotal functions is the same thing as to speak of a media-
torial office."

A still more prevalent error has been, to regard a certain
ritualism as essential to priesthood.
In the following pages I hope to prove the erroneousness
of those opinions, and to show that the Levitical priesthood
was in reality far less ceremonial than all former. ones • and
that in all its peculiarities it was an exact pattern Of the
Christian ministry."
The whole of the tract is written to show what were those
peculiarities.
They were these :
I. Public Worship, without, Sacrifice.
11. Public Teaching on the Sabbath-Day.
111. The Pastoral care.
IV. Judicial Functions.
How far this agrees with Eoruanizing tendencies,,l leave to
the judgment of my readers.
Your third charge is, that I ignore the Epistle to the
Hebrews. I believe every word, not only of the Epistle to
the Hebrews, but also of the whole Bible, to be-God's Word.
As I have already said, I have written a little treatise on
Verbal Inspiration as a truth essential to the-authority of
Holy Scripture.
The ground of your false accusation is my. saying that
Christ is nowhere called a priest, except in the Epistle to the
Hebrews ; but you omit the real force of the argument. It is
commonly alleged that, inasmuch as Christian ministers are
not called priests in the New Testament, therefore they are
not priests.

MY answer was, that throughout the whole Gentile portions
of the New Testament our. Lord is never once called a priest ;
that the question is not about names but things. The func-
tions peculiar to the Levitical priesthood, as distinguished
from former priesthoods, belong to the Christian minister ;
and, therefore, this argument about a name ianothing.
And now, to prevent farther misrepresentation, I shall state
briefly my views upon two. or three points in which I have
been grossly' misrepresented in various quarters.

L-EONANI9~i.

I. I believe Rome to be the Babylon foredoomed of God.
11. I believe Transubstantiation and the Sacrifice of the Mass
to be " blasphemous fables."
III: I believe the, Supremacy claimed by the Pope to be a
blasphemous intrusion into the Headship of Christ.

IV. I believe,the diomish Ideal of a Mediatorial Priesthood
to be an intrnsbin into Christ's High Priesthood.

11.-TRACTARIANISIK,
The views propounded in the Tracts for the Times, and by
the avowed members of that party, I believe, to be dangerously
erroneous in the following particulars :

I. In ascribing, an undue efficacy to baptismal grate, taro--
founding it with. the renewal of the soul.
11. In going too near to the Romish ideal of the Christian
Priesthood.

111. In mystifying the doctrine of th,eßealPresence,ascribing
some mysterious change to the consecrated bread and wine.

IV. In not giving to-Justification..by Faith its due place and
prominence..
V. In giving over dissenters and others to what are- falsely
called the uncovenanted mercies of God.
VI. In.being dissatisfied with our Reformed Ritual.
iit.—naarnsm.

I. I do not believe the doctrine of renewal in baptism, as
taught by the Church of Rome and by the Tractafian party.
11. I de not believe in the hypothetic view of our baptismal
service, because I think that it ascribes too much, to baptism.
1.11. I believe that baptism does no more than incorporate
into the visible church, and. so convey those spiritual pri-
vileges which belong to the visible church. Those spiritual
privileges I believe to be only the grace of the Holy Spirit to-
wards and upon us, but not that He renews the soul in bap-
tism. IV.—THE. LORD'S SUPPER.

in
LI do not believe any presence of Christ in the conse-
crated bread and wine.

IL I do not believe in. any sacrifice of the consecrated bread
and wine.

111. I do not believe, in any bodily reception of Christ in the
Lord's Supper.
IV. I believe the Lord's Supper to be both a commemoration
and a communion, but not a sacrifice.

V-TILE REAL PRESENCE.

I. By real presence is meant efficacy, and not local nearness.
The sun is present when he shines upon us, although bodily
hp is ninety-five millions of miles distant.
11. Christ's real presence I believe to be the energy of his
action upon us, . . _

That action I believe to be from the God-man Christ Jesus,
and that the energy of his power in the Lord's Supper is from
His divine and human nature.

This was symbolised in Rev. xxi., 11, by the divine light
coming through a jasper or blood-coloured lamp.

VI.-SICRIPICE.

I. There is no sin offering now either in reality or figure,
but the one continual offering of the blessed Jesus in heaven
—" a Lamb as it had been slain."—Rev. v., 6.
11. I believe that our " alms and oblations" are of the same
character as the Jewish peace-offerings, that is, presentations
to God as a thank-offering for His pardoning mercy and con-
tinual grace.

111. I believe in no other material sacrifice on our part in
Christian worship.

VII.-PRIE3THOOD.

L I believe Christ to be the only High Priest and only
Mediator.

11. I believe the Christian ministry to have succeeded to
the moral and spiritual functions of the Levitical priesthood,
but not to those offices which were limited to the Temple ritual.

VIII.-APOSTOLICA.L SUCCESSION.

I. I believe the episcopal ministry-to l;;COMe down from
apostolic times.

11. I do not believe that divine grace is limited to that
ministry.
111. I believe that those in every sect and party who fear
God and work righteousness are accepted with him.
These views you knew to be my sentiments. You knew it
twenty years ago. They are earnestly re-stated in the very
tracts which you misrepresent,
I freely forgive you yew! uutruth and your injustice. It is