Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-12-29 00:00:00

THE REV, 3. K. GL kZEBROOK TO TIM

I and charity,. snil theist twe t—cee eet ever united. Am I,
I ask, sineieg against then; tee, graces of the Holy Spirit,
when I exclaim " Grave hyp ierisy !!" Bat lam for-
getting Mr. M 's example in the mater of dealing with
Sitr,—ln shelving the total incompetency of Human infidelity. I ought to say, not that Mr.-M. is an infidel, or
Pearson to be the supreme rule of faith, in my letter of hyprocritical, bat that he is o a philosophical writer," who
December 5, I gave a short abstract of t'te opinions of the ie flourishing about ihe middle of the nineteenth century.
infidel Woolston, from Hartwell Horne:—s- Mr. Woolston, Really. Mr. Editor, I cannot but sympathize with you in
who, in his discourses on the miracles of our Saviour your labours in contending with your thousand adversaries
under pretence of vindicating the allegorical sense of on the bullion question. Are you not often tempted to lay
Scripture—endeavours absolutely to inst.'. ,y the truth of down the pen in utter despair, and exclaim, " I must gate
tie facts recorded in the Gospel. This writer asserts that it up"—" plus neg deg plus negabit" Now, though Mr.
he is the farthest of any man from being engaged in the M'a absurd opinion, that the reason of man is constituted
cane* of infidelity ; that infidelity has no place in his by God superior to Scripture, has been refuted, adnauseum,
heart ; that he writes for tae honour of Jesus, and in yet here (Bth December), it is again, and in order to prove
defence of Christianity ; and that his design in writing is it, he adduces Scripture, and, as might be expected,
to advance the Messishship and truth of the Holy Jesus," perverts it. Now, by the reason of man, Mr. M. means
to whom he says, "be glory for ever. -Amen ;" and yet not of one man, but of all, and for the purpose of proving
that o the Gospels are full of incredulities. impossibilities, his position, he quotes Hub. viii 8, who e, according to Mr.
and absurdities ; that they resemble Guiliyerien tales of M.'s own account, God says he would " put his laws into
persons and things, winch, out of remances, never had a the mind of his people, and -write them in their hearts."
being ; that the miracles recorded in the Gospels, taken The promise, then, we see, only extends to God's people
literati e, will not abide the test of reason and common eense, —it is lmited in its effec.o, and does not prove that all
but must be rejected, and the authority of Jesus aloey with men are thus enlightned. Bit, besides this. Mr. M. has
them and at the same time to cast the most scurrilous re- totally omitted an important Scriptural truth—that it is
jlections on Christ."— H. Horse, " The Necessity and by the instruinrntati yof the Word, preached or written, that
Advantage of Div ne Revelation vol. I, page 23 7ch the people of G :ere ma le acquainted with Divine truth.
edition. When I first adduced this specimen of the total Tee great Apostle of the 'Gentiles informs the Romans
imbecility of human reason in matters of religion, as a and all the worlil through 'ham, ROM. x and 17. "So
proof how utterly absurd i' is to assign to it the place of then faith come hby /smiting, and hearing by the Word of
the supreme rule of faith, I cotA net hde from myself the God." The instrumentality of the Scriptures in the rage-
general resemblance which exists between the principles of neration of man's soul, is also declared by St. Peter,
Woolston and those of the Macnaught school, if, indeed, 1 Pet 23 "Being bora again. not of corruptible seed, but
there be many persons who do not see the falsity of h's of incorruptible by the Word of God, which liveth, and
principles. Th .ugh Woolston declared the Gospels to be abideth for ever." Tae same dectsisie is taught. by St.
" full of incredulities." and no better than 't Gulliverian James. Altar having acid verse 17, "Every good gift,
tales," yet heater; he is no infidel. and wrote in defence of and every perfect gft is from ale eve, and cometh down
Christianity, and for "the honour of Jesus," though at from the Father of Lights, with whom is no variableness
the same time he "casts the most scurrilous refleciions on nor shadow of turning," he goes on to say. v. 18, "Of
Christ." Mr. Macnaught is, of course, very indtgeant at I his own will begat he us with the Word of Truth,' thus
the ebaege of inflielity, and professes in his letter re-peer- i declaring that the spiritual instruitinn and the regeneration
lag the Bishop of °nester's speech, groat reverence for the lof man, a-e effec ed by mean. of the Word of Truth
Bible. "I, accord•ngly." he sate, " reverence Ihe B hie, as The absurd d ,gma of the Maurice School, respectiug
containing. in the providence of G td, the big ant; snd most Letter and Spirit, is here contradicted. Mr. M. implies,
effectual spilitual teaching with which the world is and I may in teed say, states this spiritualist d-gma, when
blessed ;" and yet, in the very same 'sitar, he decline hot he says, Deo 8, ° Mr. G. m.in'ains the supremacy of a
belief that the Scripture writers were fallible in reltiou, law written on paper I maintain the sovereign-y of a
and more than intimates that they give "irrational tla v engraven on the mind or reason of man" Now let
versions of the tree doctrine concerning Inc/minion, us look at the feats- of tse case—is it not an incredible
Trinity, Atonement" &c. Now. I cannot see. that to absurdity fir any man in his sane mind, to maintain the
speak thus of the Religion and Theology of the Bible is at existence of such a law, when he considers the infinite
all lesa blasphemous, but rather much more bias hemoun variety of opinions prevailing This very dispute proves
than the deal -ration of Woolston, that the Gospels the absurdity of the po iti in. Way do I and Mr M
"resemble Gulliverian Tales." Another instance of Mr cliff ras we do, " toto n0e1,," on almost every doctrine of
M.'s blasphemy may be seen in p. 200 of Macnaught .n religi:n. Why is he " not in opi'iion a clergyman of
Inspiration. "We gravely." he says, o though humbly the Church of England ? Unless indeed there be,
think it possible for a rood Christian (Wo ,teion says he whieh it is bla phew to •uppose contradictory revelations
wrote `for the honour of Jesus') to ioubt whether the to the mind or reason of man. Not to press this fact,
Evaegelists were not inis/ed by their own angry which, of coerce. renders at utterly impossible for any
recollections or by the error of sue', traditions as Luke sane man to h 'ld Mr Macnau,ght's opinion on this point,
tells us he followed. &c when of Him (Chris,) they say let us I eat to the iexi on which he relies for the establish
that he bias ed a fig tree with his curse, becatfse as it is meat of his chimeric .1 distinction (xxvi. 3 —6), " For
specially recorded it hail no figs on it, when 'the time of the letter killete, but the spirit g veth &c. Dr. A.
figs was not yet' (Nam. xi. 13) —wh-ut of our blessed Lord Clarke gyms a commen sense and Scriptural interpreta-
they say that He caused swine to be needlessly destreyed tien of this passage in his commentary. The Apostle
in •thousands, that He upset the tables of the money means "that the New Testament gives the proper meaning
changers, and drove men ow of the precincts of toe of the old; -or the old covenant hid its letter and its spirit :
Temple with a scourge, and that He designated the rulers its literal and its spiritual meaning." Instead of taking
of His country 'foxes,' hypocrites,' and a generation of this coennoe s nee and cat:welly accu-a`e view of this text,
vipers.'" Is not thi. quite in the blasphemous spirit of Mr. Msenangli', manages, to use Quaeimodo's affected
Woolston, who cast the most scarrilous reflections en term, to "eliminate" a fancied antithesis between the
Christ? " spi• it of man told the "letter" of a nook. Verily with
Mr. Macneught. by rehrting to believe the narra'ives of g-eat rich, sail Sydney smith—" Genuine nonsense is
the Gospoi respecting Christ, and referring them to the more puzzling 'hen true wit." For my own part, I find
angry recollections of the writere, or to actual error, more words utt rl. fed nee in endeav girth g to express the
than insinuates that they were unbecoming the character tif profound scorn and contempt with which the mystical and
Christ, and would, if true, have be-n greet &times. Now, tel echo ol of inieri raters or rather pa verters, of
Sir, our blessed Lord said to his discip es John xiv. 26, Serialise, should, in [by poor opinion, be regarded.
" But the Comforter, which is the lady Ghost, whom the "S. lemn nonsense" is the correct title of its d .gmatie
Father will send in my name ; Ile sh alt teach you all teaching. 0 the teachers of spiritualist absurdities we
things, and bring all things to your remembrance whatever may say, es St. Paul mid of some who desired to be
I have said unto you." And yet, in di. ect cotora,olietiou to teashers of the la?: in his time, bat they elevate " the
this promise of iuspiration, Mr. Mecsaught, we have seen, leash "of sees ab ova Scripture, " understeedina neither
does not hesitate to declare that the' Evangelists mar have what they say, nor "hereof they sffirm " 1 Tim. 7. When
been misled by their own angry recollections, or by the they say with Mr. Meenaught Dec. 8), " thus in Chris-
error of tradaionsa' and that this blasphemous denial of tianity ere hursan reason and human affection exalted far
the fulfilment of the promised aid of the Holy Spirit may above any bet k," i.e. the Bible
be made by a "good Christian." Such are the confuses., But it is time to proceed to another important point,
contradicting and impious notions with which following viz, the "sameness of C'hri,t's essence with the Fisher."
the light of reason as the supreme rule of faili has led Me Now, if Mr M be se ucere i his psofes-ion (Dec 12,) that
Woolston and Mr. Macnaught In what te,pac; the in his belief " C fist is the Supreme Jehovah," it is im
blasphemy of Mr. la!Cecnaueht differs from the sift against p esihie u, di• c ,ver what difficulty there can be in *Anew-
the Holy Ghost, I must leave him and others to e )n,ei.ier. le iging that he is of "the Name essence" One God surely
But it seams, Mr. Editor, that I have no right to draw must have one essence. It is the distinction of Persons
conclusions of this condemnatory character, and that it is that is beyond our c inception, and f,,r the belief of which,
unbecoming a professedly Christian minister to charge we depsni entirely in she Word of God. This point has
upon Mr. Macuaught ‘• blasphemy, falsehood perversion, been strongly put in one of the admirable letters of Mr.
or Judas like treachery." In the same spirit of a temple Wynne. It is to be wished that the logical reasoning
charity we have just seen Mr. Macnaught saying that a healthy, moral sense, and scrirtural orthodoxy of Ma
good Christian may doubt whether he who said .• bless and Wynne s letters, may have some talcs in removing the
curse not," could have d signated the rulers of his c ,untry heretical dale tiole of Mc. %f.'s mini Mr. M affects to
"foxes," "hypocrites." and a ° generati nof vipe-s " t-eat the declaration of the Nicene Creel, that Christ is
And ye', sir, we have the inspired authority of the livl,ll- of one suhaanee with the Father, as of no importance, and
gelists that these very words of our Lord " were brought yet very incensisti tidy refuses to admit its truth. Now
to their remembrance when they wrote the Sacred Bcr p• let us see what is the history of this article of the faith,
ture." Infidelity then, it appears from Mr. Mecoanght's as given by Dr Naves', on toe Three Creeds, p. 260. The
instruction, would be more ch iritable than our L ird Arians drove the Compilers of the creeds to profess
himself. Oa this principle of pseadoscherity. God that they held the Father anti Son to be censubs'antial;
cannot be, as Scripture tells ns ho is, angry with they would have subscribed every Article of the .Apostles
the wicked every day." (Peal. vii. 11) On a shun .r prin. Creed, even of the N cane Creed, but such as declared the
ciple how can Mr. M. believe that it is said in Mat. au; Godhead of 'he Son lobe the tie' y same as that of the Father,
41, our Lord will at the last day say to th ose on his left They w mid freely have admitted that Christ was God
hand, "Depart front me, ye carted, into everlasting fire and lord ; the Son of God, begotten before all
prepared for the devil and h's angels." The truth is that age., the only begotten of the Father ; but still a
infidelity is promoted, bo'h by our ill informed teason and secondary or inferior God; a created ;in
our imperfect moral sense which objects to the deelasatioas sh o a of a d;ffetent substance. ETEe00:1010; RXXOTAVOUTIn
of Him who is infinitely .nice, holy, jest and good Wnen, for these we-e the to ms need It wss necessary to br ng
in my letter of the 6th December, 1 referred to Woolston,them nearer to the point. that the anciest public l'ermula-
I remarked with reference to Mr. M.'s infidel objections to 'ii S should not be ;ismer.° I. It was necessary to try
Scripture--'t It is these daring presumptions attacks upon theta by the p tsitive declaration that the Son was of the
revelation that place their authors de torvedly in tae rank ve-y swatenee of the Fattier begotten not male, beirg of
of infidels ;" and I was somewhat anxious to knew hew one substance with the Father. a Here." earn Dr. Vincent,
Mr..M. would deal with Woolstonnt case. In his reply, tivy dissenter front the i hurch immediately, and no recon_
Decembse Bth, he affects to doubt the truth et Hartwell ci'iation ever has. or can take place between us and them."
Horne's account, and instead of scowing the J ,des-Itke hierm 3.
profession of love to CAtier, by one who casts the most scut, Nov. Sir. it is very remarkable that it is on this very
rilous reflections on Christ. he says, "I should be slow to pint that we have at last huntel Mr. M out of his
believe that a man who thus disowned infidelity and thus equivocations and that set this very point he. like the
ascribed glory to Christ, could be so profane, or scurriku , Arians, evi le lily " dissents from the Church.' In answer
as Messrs. H and G. assert." Mr. Me canccio'ts of hie t . our donla qu-sr, oning's as to his orthod. xy in the
own profanity, to which we hare referred ie doubting th t sameness of Cheist s essence with the Father, he rep ied
truth Gospel narrative and the fulfilment of Christ's protease in apparently viremus iodiena ion at such un worthy
of the special assistance of the Sprit most poibtihly teener, insolea ions against his sincerity. "Of course I hold the
him the infidel tendency to Wo Astor). In the sann3 Homo-ousiou or oneness of substance between the Father
spirit he speaks of that blasphemous and scurrilous isfi lel and cite Son. If not. how could I repeat the Nicene Creed?"
only as a " philosophical writer of the egiuning of the In my sooty Dec 9 1 a-ked what does Mr. M. mean by
lest century." It appears, then that in eve -y case in (names, ?" If by this term he means only 't similarity,"
which it has been proved that Mr. M. was gitilty of per he has his sob ilatship," by so translating the
version. felshood, and blasphemy ;as it has beel prayed. teehilicel term, " Hieno•ousion."
we ought not, either in charity or in truth, so to express the Now, Sir, it is evident that I mean what I say here, that
conclusions to which un 'oubted facts lead us. t,Ut to if i4I s M )ran lates " h nre, tension" in the sense of
content ourselves wi h saying that Mr al is a philesephi. .`ei.o larity." he has imperilled his scholarship. Mr M
cal writer of about the middle of the 19 la century. That hie the eff-ontery to mike the false charge, that I
is all that Mr. M. seems willing to allow us to say. But obj,cted to the term " oneness," and net to the heretical
whether we consider the word philosoplly to mean the aria 8 ocitran ineaniog of •• similarity" attached to the
of wisdom or the actual possessnon of it, I, fur one, shou d right trensleti in by the term oneness—(ylr. M's letter,
resolutely refuse to rank Mr. M. amorgst philesoplasrs. Dec 12.) Oa this occasion, then. I have to speck of Mr.
He cannot in reality love wisdom, for he refes.es to receive Lai a., lea as a philo ophitial writer of tse 19th century.
the infallible wisdom of Holy Writ. " This is the curt NIr..AI will no; approve of my mentioning either perversion
damnation," said oar Lord, " that light is come into the or felsehoo f New, sir, what turns out to be the real state
world, and men loved darkness ra.hor thin light, becaese of the eae- ? U ,der all this apparently virtuous inligna-
their deeds aro evil," (John iii , 19.) He is not whe, for tion and freed en from equivocatien, there lies concealed real
he elevates human reasoe and hum in 1 arning above the heterodoxy. Wrote requested, and. in a manner, compelled
infallible teaching of the Spirit of Truth in Scripture He to explain whether he meant be "oneness of substance,"
is not wise, for perversion seems to be the natural charac. saneness of essence, he has been obliged to confess (Dec.
teristic of his mud ; and he appears to be unable, in na any 12) that "he does not see mule use or much piety, or
instances, to perceive the truth. Argument is entirely much instruction in this part of our Church's belief," and
powerless against his delusions, and any attempt to reason that. instead f holding the Catholic faith on this point in
with him is as hope'ess of success as with the corifi,med ; all its integrity. he is "content 'to hold his " peace." "I
monomanist. I should at this moment have declined to lam perfectly content," he says, "to ho'd the Homo.
continue the correspondence, had I not been called upon to ousion (sameness of essence) as at least an:article of peace."
answer Mr, M.'s misrepresentations and falsehood. and so After this forced confession of Mr. M.'s. may we not well
far as regards myself, I wish this lener to be final. I repeat his own exclamation as made in the very paragraph
shall willingly leave the question in their hands who arts cam. preceding this confession, " Prob, pudor ! proh mores."
patent to j uclete between us, some of whom have had euffi sieut s hemele-s and unprincipled, indeed, is such a confession.
experience of Mr. M.'s characteristic presence ef mind to Mr M. d ies not, however, think it an act of hypociisy in
convince them that argument is useless, and that the only him to repeat the Nicene Creed every Sunday, though he
wise way of dealing with him is to "let him alone." I had askel in a pnev.ous letter how he could possibly do so
They have, very prohab'y, found, as I have also found, by if he did "not bold the Homo-ousion." He does not think
experience, the truth of Dr. Feussett's opinion, already • it an act of dishonesty to receive the wages of a Church of
quoted, that "it is an irksome task to trace the mazes and I which he is "not in opinion" a minister. So far from
unravel the entangled web of sophistical reasoning." It I this. in -deed. that, on the contrary. in the Second Book of
will now be perceived, I imagine, that the ais a strong I Mormon Piles Macnaught on Inspiration," he has
family resemblance between the infidel Wocleton ana Mr. I dedicated a chapter to the consideration of those qualms
Msensught Wcolston objects to the miracles of the ,wh oh nrght arise in weak consciences as to the honesty
Gospels, "that they wilt not abide the test of reason : and piety of holdine preferment in a church from whose
and common sense." This is acting on the priDO,cle so doctrines we dissent as being irrational. For this Jesuis-
ob-tinately maintained by Mr. M.. that " Reason is the I tical purpose, then he commits the impiety and blasphemy
supreme rule of faith," cud is entitled to judge—by this Lof end,. vourirg to sanction hypocrisy and fraud by the
he means condemn and reject—the Scriptures ; and this ' example of our Ler I himself. This specimen of " mon-
is, indeed, the primary principle of all iefidelity, as it is i sir .us" mind blasphemous comment on our Lord's ministry
the inspiring principle of "Macnanght on Inspire ion "' is really 't toe b id" almost to be imagined But let the
The other points of strong resemblance, and almost of "B rot of aleeo,en" speaks for itself, p 204, "Now, if
identity, between Woolston and Mr. M. in g oss con re- Carist i. to he our example, and our teacher, should we
diction* and glaringly hypocritical pretensions of " writing not obey and imitate Him in this. Should we not, as
fir the honour of Jesus and in defence of Christitteity," as ministerts and teachers, be content to abide in oar several
Woolston says, hwe been already shewn. It will, there- high vocations, as long as they who bear the rule will
fore, be seen with what chew of jostice (Dec 8) allow us ? if they expel us for teaching what we conceive
says :—" I must gravely protest against Mr G.'s quoting . to be itnpe•tant truth and what, therefore, we are bound
at second-hand from those who have themselves quoted at not to suppress, let the responsiblity of so tearing them-
second-hand, some other man's denunciation of the. dead ; selves aw-av from some of the members of Christ's mystical
moreover, - I proteit against the waste of time ..nd the body the sin of such schisms—let it rest with them, and
distraction of a reader's thoughts. which are caused by the not with " Well may Mr. Wynne, and any honest
introduction into an argument of such irrelevant met or as limatieh mind at er contemptuous scorn at this " playing
this discussion of Mr. G.'e, concerning the infidelity and the pert of a tninistes " at this pions fraud, and sanctimo-
scurrility of a writer whom I have neither quoted nor °len he poerans, 'and inconceivable blasphemy. Wools ',on
read." Now, sir, em I going beyond the bounds of truth him:, r= ed not Ii me rut ered a viler or more blaeplie-

REV. J. MACNAUGHT.

mous slander against our Lord than this. Now, sir, bar
I drawn an honest conclusion in this matter, or am I only
entitled to say that Mr. Macnaught is a philosopher of the
nineteenth century ?
But let us just inquire what is meant by signing tr.
articles "as articles of peace." Dr. MacOride, on
Articles, p. 3G, says an irreligious and ist1111;
dinarian age, an opinion was started, that the Articled
were only Articles of Peace, that is, that thol
who signed them on7.i/ engaged not to contradict this
assertions. This appears to me to be no better thsl", ,
transparent fallacy by which persons, whose worldly interfs:,
as tutors or incumbents required their conformity to-tW.
standard of doctrine, endeavoured to pacify their elks
sciences. Such, when they preach, must at best
silent on tenets, on which they dissent front
judgment of the Church to which they P,
fess to adhere ; but what society would
satisfied with neut ality ? Surely Churchmen hare a 119;1
to demand that the doctrines of their church should
merely be not opposed, but that they should be expliii
and enforced." Such is the decision of the profon
learned •and the evangelically pious Dr. Macbrido,
contrasted with the Jesuit principles of Mr. Mimeo'
Tae Tile question vary naturally arises—How many of
Articles does Mr. Macnaught hold merely as article,
peace ? The first Article, "of Faith in the Holy Trinitli
the second, " of the Word or Son of Gal ;" and the nem:,_,
"of the Holy Spirit"—these he can only hpld as arti_an
of peace —the sixth, " of the Sufficiency of Holy Scrip!To
for Salvation," he can hold only in the same Jesniu's•
way, for he doss not " prove" his principles " thereby,'" be
Reason, and not Scripture, is his Supreme Rule, ancl_J,
disputes the canonicity of some of the books the'
declared canonical.
What are Mr. M.'s principles on the doctrine (41
Atonement ? What does the following blaspheel.,o ,
irsinuations against the truth of that doctrine, in lall
M.'s letter, (Dec. 4), mean :—" Is God, as some lel-
terribly seem to imply, a dreadful }ling, who reclui"d
blood before he can be placated ?" Who but a man,o
perverted mind, and a daring infidel, would, or could'',
blasplvrnolsly in'srermsent the doctrine of the Atonetneeo
(Sae Gal. i. 19,20.) " For it pleased the Father that%)
hint should all fulness dwell, and, having made Pell
through the blood of Ms cross, by Him to reconcile 10
things unto Hirweif; by Him, I say, whether they
things on earth or things in Heaven"
But, sir, it is time to conclude at present—time an. tPsci
,
forbid me to add more. I have endeavoured to show calls
why I h ye used what Mr. M. terms " hard words," 601;
in his opinion, made unjustifiable charges. I willingly Wei
the question to the decision of the candid end noprejilie,
and I tsk, " Who's the traitor ?" For my own lani',/
have learnt from Scripture 'hat there is a sin of unbent
Our Lord himself said, " This is the condemnation, I'o
light is come into the world, and men loved clariolo
rather than light, because their deeds were evil."--J°lol
iii. 19. And after his death he appeared to his diseiP „
for iha especial purpose of giving them their commission;
preach the gospel ; and be eeclared, "He that believe
oi
not shall be domned."—Mark xvi. 16. I, therefore, e 311,111,
imitate that sickly sentimen'ality aid latitudinarian 10"0j
ference which regards infidels like Woolson,g.'!o.
those who call themselves Socks •ne, to in a safe condi": j
Mr. M. charges me with a violation of charity, jf
apprehend it is no parr of charity to utter falsehood.,,
j
I have brought sufficient proof that Mr. M. is, like ail
an unfsi!lifol member of the Church—that he has uritte-oil
b'aspheinies against our Lord and against the 1101)' u eft
—am I deserving of the r.-bake implied in Mr. M.'s retitle,
that I should ke,p ms tongue from evil speaking, tle°lol
ing, ? No, sir, unfortunately for Mr. M., he Oil .
impoie upon all his readers by his gross taisrepresnotoo
lions, perversions, and falsehoods. 'These are re
numerous, that it is wearisome beyond itiei-d
st
'0 have to expose them. Ore, with refereoo
to my charging Mr. M. with a lo'asphemous and ießilts
sneer against the incomprehersibility of the MI-fi
essence," Mr Wynne his very clearly exposed, and t
gives me confi fence to believe that I may sat-Ay troe•dia
matter to those w-h,se judgment alone I value, the CIO
and the well-informed believers in the infallibility °,OO
religion. and the theology of Se ipture antlewho are of
enough to know the weakness, fallibility, and ignoraneo
the human mind, when oneriligh'ened by that SPirit,,bei
enables us to understand God's holy word and tee;
us by its in-trumentality. J, K. GLAzanno°'
Lower Darwen, Dtc. 24'1!, 1857.