The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-18 00:00:00

PUBLIO DINNLRS.

clergy, which must now amount to at least 1,( 90, have en
average income of 2001. a-year, and if I add the funds raised
for church building, education, missions, and other Church
purpoSeS,. / am ailre I shall be within the mark if I set the
ineothe df the AMMOII Chtireh at half a million sterling an-
niiailY; that IS, dpeaking *highly; 10S: a-head for the mem-
berg of het communion, or 21. 10s. for every fancily: 'ln
fact, we do not want money,' says her historian we have
funds enough ; rife vied for the ministry.' This is the na-
tural result of the zeal and interest iR engendered among
her members by an active participation in the niditgsment of
her affairs. In every department of her proceedings the advan-
tages of her system are visible. When an extension of the epis-
copate is required, she is not obliged to go, like some other
people I have heard of, to a heterogeneous Legislature com-
posed of men of every religion or of no religion; nor to a co-
lonial minister, who may be her bitter enemy, in order to ask
leave to consecrate a bishop, and to discuss the boundaries of
the diocese, and the amount of the endowment. The Ame-
rican Church settles that for herself, as every Church
ought. But I need not expatiate longer on these advan-
tages of System and organisation which the American Church
enjoys. I have been Induced to say thus much on her
constitution and progress, because, as presenting the only
instance of an ecclesiastical body in communion of the
Church of England, which possesses a regularly consti-
tuted representative government, she affords the only avail-
able precedent far her own case, and also because the signal
success which has attended a career begun under such dis-
couraging circumstances, seems to show that, in order to
fulfil her mission, the Church of England does not require
endowments or State connection ; she only wants to have her
hands untied—a clear stage, and no favour. Of course Ido
not suppose that self-government is the only cause of the
success of the American Church, but it does appear not only
to be remarkably coincident with that success, but to consti-
tute almost the only material difference between her position
and that of the Colonial Churches which are so far behind her
in available life and energy. I will next notice one or two of
the objections commonly made to a representative government
for the Church, for I need hardly say that the form of govern-
ment we wish to obtain involves the representative principle
It is said that it would encourage factions, debatings, and
party contests. I will not insist on the argument that a si-
milar objection would lie against all representative Govern-
ment, civil as well as ecclesiastical—l would rather point to
the American Church, and ask whether such an effect has
been produced there. Of course I don't mean to say that
there has been no party feeling on church matters in America
—I only say it has not been so strong, nor has it led to such
evil results' as in England ; and that there, as elsewhere, in
the Church as in the State, free and regular institutions have
been, not the cause, but the cure of faction. Again, it may be
said that self-government will lead to rash and heterodox altera-
tions in the formularies of worship, and in the discipline of
the Church ; and here I must not be misunderstood : I would
certainly claim, on the part of the New Zealand Church, the
right of managing to the fullest extent its own affairs, includ-
ing of course the regulation of worship, and the control over
formularies. While it is necessary and right that the formu-
laries of the Church of England should be the basis of union
among those who combine to form a constitution for a Colo-
nial Church, I must say that, after it is formed, I think it
would be unworthy of our position as a National Church to
bind ourselves to these formularies for ever. Why should we
not have the same right of revising from time to time our
liturgies and articles to suit our circumstances which every
National Church, and which the Church of England herself,
has repeatedly claimed and exercised? Are we afraid we
shall exercise that natural and obvious right badly ? It is
possible we may; but I am quite sure, if we are inclined to
do so, no paper restriction will prevent us nor is it advisable
that it should ; if bishops, clergy, and laity, should at any
time wish for alterations, I really see no good in trying to
make them use forms which they would on the hypothesis
disapprove of. But having said thus much on the abstract
right to effect changes, I point to the American Church as
my ground for anticipating that they will not be effectual, at
least not to any injurious extent. There was everything in
the circumstances of the American Church and people to
make wide deviations on their part from the English
ritual apriori probable ; yet it is well known that the devia-
tions actually made are altogether unimportant, both in num-
ber and character ; nay it is remarkable, and forms a remark-
able testimony in favour of our formularies, that in several
instances where alterations have been actually made, the
Church has subsequently returned, after experience of the
change, to the more ancient usage. The last, and by far
the strongest objection to representative Government
which I shall consider, is founded on the difficulty of settling
how the lay element in the proposed governing body shall be
constituted ; in other words, who shall possess the Church
franchise. This difficulty is undoubtedly a formidable one ;
indeed it is hardly susceptible Of a perfectly satisfactory solu-
tion ; for in whichever way it be settled by any particular
class of persons, it is always open to another class to ask them
who gave you authority to settle it. But this is not properly
an objection, it is only a difficulty, and difficulties are made
to be overcome. Although we may never arrive at the solu-
tion of the question which shall be logically satisfactory, we
may get in a rough and approximate way at a settlement of it
which will be sufficient for all practical purposes, For exam-
ple, a plan might be proposed by the highest authority in our
church, the bishop, or bishops, involving a settlement of the
franchise question, and if that plan were accepted by the clergy,
and the great body of those who call themselves churchmen,
it will probably be thought that as near an approximation
to the desideratum of a general assent as is necessary for
practical purposes would be arrived at. For my own part, I
am very anxious to have this question raised ; and though it
is not strictly relevant to the matter in hand, and the discus-
sion of it may appear premature, I will ask your indulgence
while I say a few words about it. After much and anxious
reflection, I can see no proper qualification for a Church fran-
chise but that of full communion ; and I say this quite irre-
spectively of any doctrinal opinion about the nature and ef-
fects of that Holy Sacrament ; I say it because this qualifica-
tion, or something strictly equivalent to it, is in consonance
with invariable usage in the ancient Church, and also indeed
in every Christian denomination, except our own, of which I
ever heard; I say so, moreover, because we can have
otherwise absolutely no guarantee that those who as-
sume to legislate for the Church are even nominally
Churchmen, still less that they observe those laws an ob-
servance of which all her members admit to be of the very
essence of Churchmenship, and while I entertain what many
would consider very democratic views about the participation
of the laity in Church government, it is a sine qua non with
me that they should be Church laity. Now, it seems a con-
tradiction in terms to say that a man is in communion with
the Church who never communicates. The very word com-
munion, as applied indiscriminately to Christian fellowship,
and to a participation in the Lord's Supper, proves that the
two ideas arc, in the minds of Christians, indentical. In-
deed, I may be wrong, but I cannot help thinking that those

who hold a different view in this matter either-have hardly

thought out the question, or are mainly actuated by what I con-
ceive to be a mistaken view of expediency. Some of them fear
that non-communicants would be offended; but I must say I
think a man who deliberately and habitually abstains from com-
nion with the Church, is not one to whose opinions and feelings
Church rules should be made subordinate. Others fear that
a communicant's franchise might lead to a profanation of the
Sacrament. Have they inquired whether in other religious
denominations, where conformity to religious ordinances is
invariably required, as a qualification for Church govern-
ment, any such profanatory effect is experienced or even sus-
pected. The fact is, it would really not be worth a man's
while, for the sake of so small an inducement, to be habitually
guilty of so great a crime. But even if it were found, as is
just possible, that such a rule might aggravate the guilt
of a few abandoned individuals, ought we to place their
supposed spiritual interests in competition with the wel-
fare of the whole Church ? Others, perhaps, have heard the
maxim, that taxation involves representation, and think ac-
cordingly that every man who pays money for Church purposes

has a right to participate in Church Government. Have they
considered how far this abstract proposition would lead them?
Certain it is that no political or religious community in the
world even admitted or acted on such a principle. No mat-
ter how far a nation may go in the direction of universal suf-

frage, it always stops short of making contribution to its re-
venue the solo qualification for political power. Women,
children, idiots, convicts, aliens, may and generally do con-
tribute to revenue, but they never enjoy its supposed correla-
tive—power. Go and subscribe to a Wesleyan meeting-house
or a Presbyterian church, and see whether your doing so will
getyoua. vote
you may reasonably
t makehe next conference
contributionernceorhenext
assembly
one qualification, but I cannot even conceive a pro-
posal deliberately made that it should be the only one.
On the other hand, I hardly think any one will propose as a
statement permanent
ofqualificationm
bf oeir• s
hCihpu r c T
hh
igsov againe r mwe
onut
da b simplee quite
unheard of ; no religious or political privilege was ever yet
granted'on the mere condition that a person claimed it, for it
comes to that ; there is always required some test of his sin-
cerity—something that involves a question of fact upon
which the claimant may be objected to, if he be not telling
the truth. There remains therefore only the alternative of
a double franchise, i. e., a statement of Church membership
combined with a payment ; and this is the franchise
which has been apparently proposed for adoption in
Wellington, and it may be said in South Australia also,
for seat-renting involves in some degree a profession of
Churchmanship as well as a money payment. To this rule
I object, in the first place, that it does not secure the real
churchmanship of the governing body, and, in the second, that
pecuniary payment ought not to be mixed up with Church
franchises at all. Wherever it is adopted, the best Churchmen
may be excluded because poor, while persons who are notori-
ously not Churchmen will have votes in Church matters, and
assist in making Church laws. On the whole, therefore, it
does appear to me that no good reason can be assigned why
the Church of England should adopt a more lax rule with re-
spect to its franchises than any other ecclesiastical body. I
trust you will pardon me for this digression, if it be one, and
for having intruded my own view of this subject on you at
so much length. My object in doing so is not to pro-
cure auy expression of opinion on it, still less the
adoption of any practical step by the meeting, but
merely to bring it before the mind of the public, in the sure
hope that by full consideration and free discussion the objects
which we have all at heart will be best promoted. It will
perhaps be expected that I should say a few words as to the
relation which the proposed body would bear to the Canter-
bury Association. My own view is this. It is perfectly
competent for the association to make any provision it pleases
for the management °fits own funds, but I have not the slightest
doubt that if a body be constituted which shall really repre-
sent the Church in this settlement, the association will, as a
matter of course, hand over to it the management of its eccle-
siastical fund. I will conclude by saying that the practical
step we propose to the meeting is merely to elect a corresponding
committee, and to ascertain from the bishop, and the church-
men of other settlements, what it is that they are going to do.
Whether it will be our business afterwards to go more into
the details of a plan or whether the bishop will be pleased to
draw out a plan, and invite our co-operation in it—whether
we shall begin by petitioning Parliament, or, as I should much
prefer, the Colonial Legislature, to make us a corporation, or
whether, like the people of South Australia, we shall endeavour
to organise ourselves, and go on temporarily without being le-
gally incorporated, will depend on the nature of the answer
we receive. I only trust that now, having begun, we shall
not let the matter drop; I trust we shall see that if
our Churchmanship be not a sham, if we really take any in-
terest in our Church, if we care as much about it as we should
do about a joint-stock company in which we had invested
fifty pounds, we shall do with respect to it what as men of
business we should do as a matter of course in a worldly case
—we shall claim for the ecclesiastical society to which we be-
long a constitution and a government.

(From the Times.)
Public dinners are public bores. What man of sub-
stance is there— or, still worse, what man suspected of
substance—who is not pestered at the least two or three
times in every year to give himself a public indigestion
in the cause of charity ? The season is now approaching
when these exhibitions take place, and, ere they are
taken in hand, we would endeavour to discourage them
by Ml the means in our power. The real fact is, nobody
is benefitted by them . but the tavern-keeper. The
various charitable institutions in the names of which
the banquets are spread are absolutely injured by the
system. Funds which, but for the dinners, would
find their way into the treasury of the charity, are in-
tercepted by the till of the tavern, and no one, that
we can discover, except " mine host," is a bit the
better for the arrangement. First let us consider the
subject as torture unnecessarily inflicted upon human
beings. Who does not remember to have been
dragged under the still burning influence of a July
or August sun to some horrid den in the city about
six or half-past six o'clock p.m. ? He goes through
preliminary ceremonies much the same as those he would
be called upon to endure had he been mad enough to
venture upon a dive into the pit of the Lyceum or Hay-
market at the same season of the year. Next he finds
himself amidst a crowd of perspiring fellow-sufferers in
black—some with rosettes at their buttonholes, like
Coronation horses, all doing their best to reconcile an
expression of benevolence with that studious avoidance
of fellowship with strangers which is one among the
many amiable characteristics of our countrymen. Then
there is the insane rush upstairs to discover the plate on
which the counterpart of one's voucher is deposited ;
the attempt, of course, is useless. You look around you
for advice, but everybody is in the same condition as
yourself, except one tall stern man, somewhat bald
about the temples, who has realised his number,
and stands sentinel over the position. Come what
may, you daren't ask him. At this moment the
idea of a Hansom and Liberty will flash across the mind,
but you are under the spelt, and must see the feast out
whether or no. You rush upstairs among more per-
spiring men, to consult " the plan," and find, theo-
retically speaking, that you are billetted opposite the
stern man, although you could be sworn in any court of
justice in Christendom that you had strained your eyes
in vain to discover your ticket for a hundred plates up
and down on either side of the spot indicated. Finally,
afterrushing backwards and forwards between "the plan"
and thestern man half-a-dozen times, you find the ticket
on the plate suggested, although it is clear enough that
it must have been deposited there for the first time
during your last absence to consult " the plan."
Well, let us suppose this to be over, and that ali
the perspiring revellers are duly placed, including a
diplomatic-looking member of the Upper House, with a
red riband across his white waistcoat, who is to let off
the great speech of the evening. On either side of the
" chair" are half-a-dozen grandees--one or two of them
excessively dull-looking men—who, as you are informed
in a whisper, are India directors or possess unbounded
influence over the future destinies of the Namur Rail-
road. Then there is a gentleman connected with the
American Mission, who is sure to say something after
dinner about the graves of Milton and Shakspere. But
we have not space to describe all the grandeur. The
dinner is good—or, in the present instance, we will as-
sume it to be so, although heaps of charity dinners
are detestably bad ; but we wish to take the thing at
the best. Your soul is thirsting for cool streams, not
lusting after fleshpots ; but there is no help for it. Fall
to and eat. Eat and drink—drink and eat. You have
a chance of hearing from your neighbour that it is pub-
licly reported " Her Majesty is doing pretty well after
her confinement," or that " 'Tis very warm in the Royal
Academy about 2 p.m." That is your only intellectual
relaxation until the speaking begins, and then, despite
of yourself, you find yourself swallowing wine by the
bumper and tapping the table under the influence of the
stern man opposite you, who has already mastered pub-
lic opinion in his neighbourhood, and puts you down
with a glance if you tap a little longer than he deems
consistent with exact propriety: So matters go on for
two or three dreamy hours—but the dreams are bad
dreams—until you escape out of doors into what seems
a furnace cooling down. In two or three days you get
over it ;—and that's the end of a Charity Dinner.
We have purposely omitted all mention of the col-
lection, for that must be considered the very essence of
the whole business, and deserves ampler remark. As
we said before, we have taken a public charity dinner
at its best, and presumed the affair to be a real banquet
as far as gormandizing is concerned. But all this gluttony
in action must be paid for. It is said that but for the
feast there would be no collection, and no tickets bought.
Of course there would be no tickets bought if there
were no feast—no after-dinner collection if there
were no dinner. There would, however, be something
a great deal better in the shape of undiminished
donations and subscriptions to the charity. Grant
that the gross receipts may be smaller—the net receipts
would certainly be greater, and that is the only ob-
ject in view. Nobody shall ever persuade us that
amidst two or three hundred men of average common
sense who have thus been penned up in heated rooms,
as in a charitable Smithfield, a dozen could be found
who enjoy the thing for its own sake, who look upon
it as a real festive meeting. Men do not go to such
places to forget the toils of business and the anxieties
of life, for a few hours of friendly intercourse with
their fellow-creatures. No such thing ; they have been
talked into it—baited into it—persecuted into it—and
there they are, and must endure it. They have screwed
their charity up to martyr pitch, and are smiling at the
stake. We cannot, however, -dismiss this part of the
subject without noticing the additional engine of pecula-
tion which is brought to bear upon the Queen's poor sub-
jects in connexion with these orgies. An endeavour is
made to force you into what is called the stewardship.
Now, the sole duty of a steward is to pay 4/. or 51. in place
of the simple guinea that he would have paid for his ticket
in his private capacity. To such an extent is this system
carried that there has been an instance in which there
have been 200 stewards to 40 guests. This case is much
the same as that of the German Principality towards the
close of the last century, in which the standing army
consisted of a single man ; but there were two field-
marshals, and general officers in proportion, to look
after him, form him into squares, make him deploy, and
what not. It may be asked, why do we exclaim against
a process when the result is an additional subscription
to a charitable object ? We reply, that all the persons
who can fairly be induced to give the 41. or 51. in the
character of the steward would give it any way. As far
as regards the compelled steward, we do not see why
men should be bullied into almsgiving more than
into anything else. Besides, the result is not such
an addition to the funds of the charity as might
have been obtained had the money been paid without
being subject to deduction under the head of tavern bills.
It would be much better to collect the sums subscribed
without any dinner at all, and to gratify any little
vanity that may be at the bottom of the transaction by
publishing the names of subscribers. What more is
gained by the present arrangement? We verily believe
that, in the majority of instances, the whole affair lies
between the secretary and the tavern-keeper. We have
heard of a case in which the secretary to more than one
of these benevolent institutions has been presented with
a piece of plate, as a public acknowledgment of his
charitable exertions. This is flattering, of course, but it
is remarkable that the landlord of the tavern at which
the greatest number of the feasts was held figures for
the very largest subscription in the list.
We are not writing with the intention of directing our
observations against this or that particular charity.
We would have our remarks understood as applicable
to all charity dinners. But it so happens that at the
present moment a contest upon this very subject in the
case of the Literary Fund, is being carried on with consi-
derable violence on both sides. The question for decision
of course is, whether or no it be for the interest of the
" fund" that the dinners should take place. Now, we
do not mean in any way to mix ourselves up with
the facts of the case, but to take the assertions
of the disputants upon their own showing. The
reporter for the managers asserts that the dinner of
1851 cost 1391. ss. 6d. (add singers, '7l. 75.) ; and that
of 1852 cost 1461. 145.; and that if to these sums be
added the full share of the printing, stationery, adver-
tising, and incidental expenses, it appears that by the
sale of tickets, the contributions of stewards and other
honorary visitors, and donations directly traceable to
the dinner, exclusive of the Queen's benefaction and
other annual subscriptions, the dinner of 1851 produced
a clear profit of 518/. 2s. 6c1., and the dinner of 1852 a
profit of 5571. 16s. id. The opponents of the
management pull this estimate to pieces, and show
from the published accounts that there must be
gross error in the calculation. They take from
the accounts of the fund each heading separately, and
show how small is the amount over which the dinner can
exercise any possible influence. They tell us that for
years the guinea tickets and the stewards' fees did not
pay the expense, but that there was an annual loss of
from 501. to 601. in consequence of the dinners. Who
may be right or who wrong in this particular instance
we have no means of knowing. We take the chief facts
tossed about in a public controversy, and leave fur-
ther discussion to the persons more immediately con-
cerned. But we are very confident that in the main, in
this instance as in all others, right must be with those
who do not set about making money by wasting it in
tavern revelry and unnecessary prodigality.
A

FRENCH CAPTAIN JOHNSON.—The Paris police
lave just arrested a man, who, under the name of the
Count de Bondy, has been carrying on a curious system
of swindling. He was accustomed to go to tradesmen
who deal chiefly with females, and obtain from them in-
formation respecting such of their customers as were
unmarried, anxious to wed, and possessed of a certain
amount of property. He then contrived to get an intro-
duction to some of the females, and by representing him-
self to have an income of B,OOOE, and, being on the look-
out for a wife, soon persuaded them to receive him
on a footing of familiarity. He afterwards on different
pretexts obtained from them various amounts, and then
ho
he disappeared. One of them was a poor woman, w
RETURN OF PARDONED CONVICTS.---The Falcon, brig, only just knewfhxoewi
atno,seign her name ; and he got her
under the belief that it was a
with '2B pardoned convicts on Board, arrived at Dept- tdoeesdigla a bill of
he Made' over to her all his property as a
ford, on the 12th inst., from Bermuda, which place she Y. v
left on the 17th ult. They were landed at the yard on
the following day, received the gratuities due to them Temple, also, he obtained 200 E, on the
proof Ot hisljdiacofflection for her. From a small tradesman
in the Ruei
he
from the storekeeper of that establishment, and oncewould give him an interest in a coal-
pretenwee.tehiaitiad
just been discovered in the more allowed to enjoy the sweets of liberty, which it is mine
ofhi
neighbour-
to be hoped they will now better appreciate. Several of hood . Paris, and which was expected to be extraor-
thedinaril profitable.
number appeared to have reached the evening of 'T., CONDEMNED .. Y
CONVICTS IN CHESTER CASTLE.—
life. Two of them also, singular to relate, were brothers.
TheHwEretched women, Honors Gibbons and Bridget
Toe much cannot be said in praise of the excellent sys-
tem adopted by the Government of reserving a portion Gerratty,i who were sentenced to death by Mr. Justice
of their wages until the expiration of their term of cap- Wightrian' at the late Chester Assizes, for poisoning a
tivity, as it enables them to avoid the temptation
to
child of the former's with vitriol, for the purpose of ob-
which they would otherwise be exposed, to return to'
their evil ways if turned adrift. on the wide world pen-attempt is being made to intluee
twining 31. or 41. from a burial club, are to be executed
this day week. An
niless. . I Lord Palmerston to spare Garratty's life, They have
made no confession as yet of the crime,.