The Press.
London, England, 1856-10-18 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

The sick fare as badly with their drugs as
children with their sweets. Consumptive
patients hoping for recovery from cod-liver
oil are treated to An extract from refuse
fish :
It is known that, even in Newfoundland, the livers of
all kinds of fish are taken. and the oil imported to this
country as the pure cod-liver oil. We have been informed
that there exists at the present time in England a manu-
factory for the production of the so-called cod-liver oil,
which is nothing more than the oleaginous material ex-
tracted by pressure from any kind of refuse fish which has
been rendered unsaleable, either from decomposition or
over abundance.
Calomel is often adulterated with chalk, and
jalap with " powder of post,' the medical
term for sawdust. Opium, which if pure
would be worth 20s. per pound, is commonly
sold in the drug market at 4s.
In face of all these facts—which though
not new are conveniently brought together in
this little volume—what is to bo done? Go-
vernment inspection is the most obvious
remedy, and it is that which the author recom-
mends :
In France, if the practice of adulteration commenced
earlier than in England, its suppression commenced
earlier also. There the head of the analyst has been fol-
lowed rapidly by the hand of the law ; and no sooner did
the French chemist demonstrate the fatal extent to which
numerous articles of diet were being sophisticated, than
the French Government occupied itself with the punish-
ment of the adulterators, and directed that the police should
use all possible efforts for discovering them. But in Eng-
land the only protecticu for the public, under the present
laiasepfaire system of government, is that afforded by pub
lications, in which the means of detecting adulterations
are clearly indicated. Any attempt at fraud on the part of
the customer is punished by law, and, above all, is easily
detected. The bad shilling is at once recognised, and nailed
to the counter ; but the poisonous adulterations practised
upon food remain too frequently undiscovered, until their
effects are shown in the indisposition or, perhaps, serious
illness of the consumer.
Milk is often taken jfrom diseased cows, and
there should be inspectors for milk sellers :
The only way to remedy the evil is by the appointment
of Government inspectors, empowered to enter the cow-
sheds at any time, and visit the owners with severe fines,
or, better still, with imprisonment, whenever they are found
to be in an uncleanly or unhealthy condition.
Government inspection is demanded for all
trades ; but for this purpose an army of Go-
vernment spies would have to be distributed
through the country, and as confessedly the
excise officers are much less vigilant than they
should be, what security is there that the new
inspectors would be more vigilant in the dis-
charge of their duties° Centralisation would
extend itself, until the people, thinking it
needless to exercise vigilance for themselves,
would trust wholly to the Government for
protection, and perhaps be worse served than
ever.
Still what is to be done? The prosperous
classes may be allowed to take care of them-
selves. If they deal with disreputable trades-
men, or expect commodities below their just
value, the fault is their own. But can we
blame the poor for endeavouring to save a
halfpenny per pound on sugar, or for going to
the baker who announces a fall in bread before
his fellows ? Must children continue to be
poisoned without interference, and the sick be
suffered to die through want of the medicines
which might recover them ? In the end we
fear we shall have to come to Government
inspection, for statutory enactments without
some machinery to enforce them would be a
dead letter. The point is whether society
cannot do something for its own protection.
We have societies for most useful purposes.
Why should there not bo an anti-adulteration
society ? A few Dr. Hassalls, active and skilful,
and above the reach of corruption, might pro-
long by some years the average duration of
life, and save the public millions of money
now spent only to purchase disease and death.
The Legislature would in that case no doubt
supply laws to punish traders who except for
the universality of their practices would be
justly regarded as malefactors. This seems
the only remedy that can be suggested.

Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament.
By Alfred Barry, M.A. London : J. W.
Parker and Son.
IN this volume Mr. Barry, a son of Sir Charles
Barry, the architect, and himself now }lead
Master of the Leeds Free Grammar School,
takes frequent occasion to mention thu

SATURDAY,

gations which he owes to the teaching of Mr.
Maurice. Tile book shows that the acknow-
ledgment is just. It perpetually reminds us
of that compromise between modern latitu-
dinarianism and ancient orthodoxy which is
a leading characteristic of Mr. Maurice's
writings. He wishes to retain the integrity of
Scripture, yet to give Scripture, from his
point of view, a rationalistic interpretation,
and the result is a kind of confusion infinitely
more puzzling than the difficulty which the
commentary was intended to remove. As
with the master so with the disciple. Mr.
Barry appears to consider that he has only to
darken that which was obscure to produce
light. He undoes knots by adding new coils
to the string.
Mr. Barry tells us that his chief object has
been, not to supply an " apology " for the Bible,
in the style of some German theologians, but
that the Scriptures may be willingly studied,
" to suggest a few leading principles, to indi•
" cate, where necessary, the bearing of the
" chief difficulties which perplex a thoughtful
" reader, but most of all to trace the evolution
"of the great scheme which gives to the
" whole of the Bible so true a unity." He
insists on the progressive nature of God's
system of government, and quotes with ap-
probation the reply of Hooker to the Puritans,
who insisted on the immutability of God's
positive laws—" that though God's truth be in
" itself above all change, yet that the declare)-
" tions of it to men must from the nature of
" the case adapt themselves to mutable beings,
" and thus admit of change both in form and
" degree." We once heard a dissenting minis-
ter express himself that the books of the Old
Testament are as the large letters of a
child's primer—the rudimentary teaching by
which hereafter the mind may be expanded.
With this view, the question is still whether
the facts recorded are to be accepted as
literal facts ; or are to be explained away as
delusions, affecting those whom they con-
cerned at the time as truths ; or are to be
treated as mere types and figures of truths.
The teaching of Mr. Maurice and his follow-
ers, if we rightly apprehend it, accepts all these
principles of interpretation. It insists on the
literal truth of Scripture, yet gives to it an
esoteric interpretation. For this reason
probably Mr. Maurice is popular among
the Unitarians in this country. They see
that he leans towards rationalism, and they
are inclined to claim him as one of them-
selves, though the sympathies of Mr. Maurice,
apart from his peculiar views of Scripture
truth, incline him more towards the spiritual.
ism ani authority of the High Church party.
Mr. Barry, following in the track of his
master•, says that " the description of Divine
" things must be more or less imperfec:,
" because they must generally be symbolical;
" the exhibition of Divine truth, even con-
" cerning ourselves, must be partial, giving us
" very often views from opposite sides which
" seem inconsistent, because we cannot take
"in the whole." On the next page he illus-
trates his meaning by that part of the Scrip-
ture narrative which has been much can-
vassed—the command of Joshua that the sun
should stand still :
When we are told that the " sun stool still," not merely
is there no assertion of the sun's absolute motion, but we
are not told, because it does not concern us to know, whe-
ther the revolution of the earth was checked, or whether
by some extraordinary refraction or meteoric effect the
appearance of sunlight was continued. The only point of
consequence is, that the day was miraculously prolonged ;
the language need only be such as to convey that truth
clearly. Similarly, to take a less famous instance, when
we are told that the rainbow was " set in the cloud," after
the flood, as a sign; the important point is the fact of the
sign and its meaning, but whether the appearance of the
rainbow then first found place, or, having existed before,
was only made a sign then, is a matter of speculation and
curiosity.
This principle of interpretation, it is obvious,
admits of great latitude. If we may suppose
that the day was only prolonged by a meteor,
or false sun, we may suppose, by a very slight
further stretch of this principle of interpreta-
tion, that the senses and minds of the
Israelites were merely impressed with an idea
that the sun stood still, which would, for them,
be exactly the same thing as if the sun had
really stood still. Another rationalist might
carry the principle further, and assert that as
the narrativo was written fur future gomera-

OCTOBER 18, 1856.

tions, if it produced an impression of truth
on their minds, the end was sufficiently an-
swered, whether the fact itself ever took place
or not. We refer to this particular passage as
exactly illustrative of the whole tenor of Mr.
Barry's book. He would, in his interpretation
of Scripture, be at once literal and ;•ationalis-
tic, and hence an element of confusion is in-
troduced fir more puzzling in our opinion
than the difficulty attempted to be removed.
He tell us, in his preface, "that the great
"trial of Scripture, in our own country at this
"time, turns, not on metaphysical difficulties,
" or questions of external evidence. but on the
" proof of its harmony with what is called
" Natural Religion,' that is, with the great
" principles of righteousness and love, to
" which the conscience bears witness." In
reality, however, the book is chiefly occupied
with attempts to remove the objections raised
by natural science to the literal truth of the
Scripture record, and so far from not being an
apology, it is an apology throughout, and of a
very unsatisfactory kind. In noticing the
arguments derived from geology to prove that
creation was progressive, he states—after partly
reasoning, however, that the Mosaic account
admits of a rationalistic interpretation—

We cannot tell how it is that there are, at best, such
uncertain traces of the comparatively sudden creation in
six days. We should doubtless have expected to be able
to trace a great break in the continuity of physical exis•
tence.

Then he falls back on the solid ground that
every word of the Mosaic history implies that
the creation was " miraculous; that is, as
" carried on by laws, distinct from the present
" laws of nature, by which its works are sus-
" tained. If we believe miraculous action at
" all, it cannot be strange to find it here, at
"the first source of the present natural
" system."
Why then, it must be asked, the evident
hankering to refer what the Scripture de-
clares was miraculous, to purely natural
causes? He takes the same line with regard
to the Deluge. The geological assumption is,
that no traces of a universal deluge exist on
the earth. Mr. Barry replies-Ist, by assum-
ing its miraculous character, which would
leave no appearances conformable to the con-
clusions of natural science ; and, 2nd, by
showing that appearances exist in connection
with the Scripture record perfectly consistent
with the conclusions of natural science.
First
Now it seems, in the first place, by no means absurd to
conceive that, as the Deluge was miraculous, distinct—
that is, from the ordinary growth of this earth under the
Inas of nature—so it may have pleased God that it should
pass away without leaving its footprints amidst the traces
of natural formation. In our ignorance of the physical
machinery by which the flood teas produced, we cannot
say whether it was probable, even without any miraculous
interference, that its subsidence should have removed all
traces of its action.
Secondly :

The Scripture positively assures us of nothing more
than that the Deluge swept off tie whole race of men, and
overwhelmed that part of the natural world which had
been assigned to them. This it would do, even if it did
not extend over the whole earth. Thus, in the silence of
God's word as to its literal universality, human science
may he allowed to speak ; and, if it be true that while the
general evidence is against the supposition of a universal
deluge, there are probable indications of a local one near
what has always been deemed the primeval seat of man,
viz., in that part of Western Asia ( Mesopotamia, Bokhara,
Eliorasaan, and parts of Affghanistan and Turkistan )
which is now depressed more than one hundred feetbelow
the level of the sea, then we can give these geological
facts and negations any weight they seem to deserve, while
the truth of Holy Scripture remains unassailed.
Which principle of interpretation, after all,
are we to adopt—the miraculous or the
rationalistic one ? Mr Barry gives us our
choice. But he appears to forget that when
two principles of explanation are furnished,
each antavonistie to the other, they are so far
from silencing objections that they merely
negative each other. They do not reconcile
antagonists ; they only give to each a sword.
Elsewhere, Mr. Barry observes that to en-
deavour to account for the phenomena of the
Deluge

by the ordinary laws of nature, is little less preposterous
than to inquire by what laws of 1)3E110:A5141i the waters of
the Red Sea were pelted. and ity what known physiologi-
cal processes the life of Lazarus a-as restored. if it be
once helieved that a miracle is here recorded, its extent
and grandeur cannot surprise us when we remember the
nature of the Divine Agent, in whose creation the whole
earth is but as a grain of sand. Difficulties of this kind

THE PRESS.

are evidently most unphilosophical, and hardly deserve
serious notice.

Exactly: yet to this unphilosophical mode of
treatment NJ r. Barry continually condescends.
In dealing with the principle of " Inspira-
tion " Mr. Barry manifests the same want of
directness. Arc we to suppose that the
writers of the sacred record were directly in-
fluenced, directed, and controlled by the Iloly
Spirit, or that they were merely subject to a
kind of illumination varying with their indi-
vidual character? To this question Mr. Barry
replies :
Firstly :

The theory of "dictation," which reduces the prophets
or evangelists to mere instruments—" the pens and not
the penmen of the Holy Spirit,"—is one, as has been said,
not only utterly inconsistent with the whole analogy of
God's dealings, lint also derogatory to the depth of Divine
wisdom, which chose to communicate itself through a
human spirit.

Secondly :
Yet some belief in a verbal inspiration is, as has been
said, absolutely essential to the plenary authority of the
Bible.

Anil, thirdly, comes the conclusion, in which,
as usual with the author, nothing is con-
cluded :
Whether we are to call it one of " suggestion " or
" direction," it may be time to settle, when we can estab-
lish a theory as to the source and process of origination in
our own thoughts.

In precisely this manner are we usually left
to decide between the difficulties which the
author has raised and combatted in turn.

The fundamental idea with which he starts,
noticed at the commencement of this article—
that the trial of Scripture in our time turns on
the proof of its harmony with the great prin-
ciples of righteousness and love, to which the
conscience bears witness—is open to criticism.
" The conscience r What conscience ? The
conscience of man varies widely with times,
with circumstances, and with creeds. The
conscience to which Mr. Barry refers, as con-
nected with the great principles of righteous-
ness and love, does not subsist of itself at all.
It has been formed by Christian teaching, and
those who deny its Divine original are still
susceptible of that Divine influence, from the
moral and spiritual atmosphere in which they
live. For those who have gained their ideas of
" natural religion" from the revelations of
Scripture to object that the Scripture does not
come up to their ideas is absurd. What our
sceptics term " natural religion " is a very un-
natural kind of religion—repugnant, that is,
to the conceptions of the natural man. Else-
where Mr. Barry says, with that confusion of
thought deplorably conspicuous in his
volume :
The first record of our race shows how great an error it
is to assume the existence of a " natural religion," as in-
dependent of Revelation."

But why then does Mr. Barry assume that the
unregenerate and unenlightened conscience
can bear witness to great principles of righ-
teousness and love ? Had such a power re-
sided in the conscience of itself there would
have been less need of a Revelation than is
practically experienced. It may be questioned
whether the proof of the truth of Revelation
does not consist more in its opposition to the
natural state of man than in its accordance
with it. The vulnerable point in Butler's great
argument is, that in insisting on the analogy
between Nature and Revelation, he is open
to the reply that we should expect such
analogy to exist on the assumption that the
scheme of Revelation proceeded from men
acted on by natural influences. The most
acute and pleasing chapter in " Paley's Evi-
dences " is that in which he shows the origin-
ality of Christ's teaching, and its immea-
surable superiority to whatever the natural
conscience had previously borne witness to.
The parts of this " Introduction" which
please us most are those occupied with histo•
tical criticism, though it is rarely satisfactory
in the sense of being conclusive. On all
points Mr. Barry contrives to leave the mind
of his readers in a state of doubt. The re-
mark, however, that allegory cannot be too
sparingly admitted as a principle of scriptural
interpretation, while symbolism cannot be too
largely received, is undoubtedly just. We
only wish that the author had adhered more
to that literal truth of Scripture which he in-

1001

sists is tho only safe principle, though his
method shakes tho foundations ou which it

rests.

Kate Coventry. An Autobiography. Edited
by G. J. Whyte Melville. London: J. W.

Parker and Son.

Trtz writer of this agreeable fiction has already
achieved so high a reputation by his two
previous stories of " General Bounce " and
" Digby Grand," originally published, like the
present one, in Fraser's Magazine, that he
needs no recommendation to our readers.
" Kate Coventry " is a much shorter story than
either of the other two, and has less preten-
sions to thought and sentiment. It is simply
the chronicle of a fashionable young lady's life
in town and country, who professes to be rather
less insipid, constrained, and formal than the
majority of the sisterhood. And doubtless no
one who calls to mind the " Lady's Diary "
in the Spectator can fail to congratulate
himself on the change that has taken place
in our habits between the days of George I.
and Queen Victoria But, independently
of the characters depicted, about whose
merits there will probably he great diffe-
rences of opinion, the style and method
of Major Melville are sure to please.
There is an airy gaiety. an unceasing
flow of high spirits, a fund of happy
phraseology at his command, which will
render " Kate Coventry " a prominent favo-
rite with all who read novels for amuse-
ment, and are perhaps rather wearied
than improved by those volumes of high-art
morality which are so much in vogue at pre-
sent. The great moralist of the last century
thought that a comedy had answered its pur-
pose if it made the audience laugh. Is it not
fair, on the same principle, to call that novel
successful which affords us at once excitement
and diversion, without seeking painfully for
more recondite excellences, or probing into
minute defects?

The character of the heroine is in its general
effect good. We are not blind to certain ex-
aggerations of detail by which it is disfigured,
but they only render it a caricature—they do
not make it an abortion. Kate's" fastness" some-
times goes too far, and her slang and sauciness
are occasionally such as we cannot exactly call
unfeminine, but which trespass on the limits
of good breeding. An instance of the former
is the scene on Sir Guy Scapegrace's drug;
of the latter, her use of such expressions as
"a dogcook," and her speech to her aunt
Horsingham, in which, among other tolerably
free and easy phrases, she observes, in vindi-
cation of her out-door exercise, " I've got
" two legs, very good legs, Aunt Horsingham—
" shall I show you them ?" and so forth. All
this is pardonable enough, yet not perhaps in
the best of taste. Kate indeed is a character that
will not be very popular with lady readers,
who, neither in real life nor in fiction, aro
partial to what we have heard termed " men's
women." But she is not, we repeat, unnatural.
The best fictitious characters are a little embel-
lished, just as the prettiest women on tho
stage require paint. Perhaps Major Melville
uses it rather too freely ; but his heroine is a
genuine and original character, and no mere
walking lady.
It is remarkable that very few male novelists
have drawn good portraits of women, and very
few female ones of men. What the one sex
has to say of the other must necessarily be the
fruit of observation, and not of intuition.
Sometimes, indeed, the power of observation
is so keen, and the aptitude for portraiture so
great, that it produces almost as complete
results as the superior faculty. But such
qualities are exceedingly rare, and it is hardly
any disparagement to a writer of fiction to say
that he does not possess qualities vouchsafed
to scarcely one in a thousand.
The other characters in the story—with the
exception, we should say, of Squire Haycock—
are but so many foils to the centre figure.
Frank Lovell and Cousin John, Mrs. Lumley
and Lady Scapegrace, are cleverly-executed
sketches, and nothing more. But in the
Squire there is a distinct idiosyncracy. His
absurdities are of course exaggerated ; but he
is not near so unreal as Sam Weller or Mr.