The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-05 00:00:00

day equally strict and obligatory with that of the
Jewish Sabbath, and applies to the former all the
Scriptures of the Old Testament which have express
reference to the latter. This was the view brought
in and adopted by the old Puritans immediately
after the Reformation. The second theory is that
which makes the day a Christian .feast, to be ob-
served with holy exercises, rational amusement,
and moral improvement.
It was this last which was adopted by us in as-
serting that the Crystal Palace might be opened on
Sundays, within certain restrictions, without peril
to the interests of religion, or the well-being of tho
community—in fact, without sin against God, or
injury to man ; and this view we are prepared to
maintain.
But. we are not prepared to aid and abet the theo•
ries put forth at the meeting of working men at St.
Martin's Hall, on Wednesday night, and which we
reported yesterday. We are ready t• aid their cause
by proving that intellectual amusement on Sunday
is quite compatible with the sacred duties of that
day. But we are not disposed to aid them in as-
serting that the same sacred duties are not obliga-
tory upon them. It is one thing to say that because
they are tied down to work all the week, therefore,.
they may take harmless recreation on Sunday; but
quite another to propound, that, because the week
is all work, therefore Sunday is to be all play. It
is reasonable to maintain that Almighty God does
not enjoin a burdensome observance of the Chris-
tian Sunday; but it is profane to affirm that he en
joins no observance at all.

The cause which the working men assembled to
promote was good so long as it was confined to the
simple object of securing the ad-Vantage of admission
to the Crystal Palace on Sundays. "The sympathies
of many religious persons went with them, and they
were-sure of strong support in many high quarters.
One only fear there was, which some persons warmly
expressed, that the tendency would be to a disavowal
of the sanctity of the dajr altogether, and an ap-
proximation to the lax practices which prevail all
over the Continent ; in which case, • many who
strongly sympathise with the working men of Lon-
don would feel compelled to withhold their support
from the movement.

Unfortunately for themselves, the working men
have allowed themselves to be lured into this mis-
take. ~The show of learning which garnished the
speech of Mr. Henry Mayhew, on Wednesday,
was well calculated to mislead the unwary and un-
instructed. What could the working men say in
answer to learned references to ancient writers and
primitive fathers, told glibly out, and set forth in
imposing array ? When Pliny, and Justin Martyr,
and Socrates, and Gregory Nyssen, and Constan-
tine, and Cranmer, and Melancthon, and Calvin,
and Bound, and Paley, are heaped up in the face
of astonished butchers and bakers, what could they,
however generally intelligent, but submit with a
good grace to such ponderous testimony ? The
answer to his mischievous argument rests with
those who have bad greater leisure and advantages;
nor shall it be our fault if the working men of
London do not see the other side of the question.
Meanwhile, we earnestly intreat of them, as they
value their stake in this great movement, at once
to repudiate and disavow that unsound, flagrant,
and mischievous declaration, into the passing of
which they allowed themselves to be entrapped on
Wednesday night. In no. country in the world
have the working classes such friends as the work-
ing classes of this country have amongst those
whom Providence has called to an easier lot. To
the cause of the working man, not the aristocracy
only, but all the best of the great middle class of
the country, are prepared to give the ablest suc-
cour. Their dwellings, their literature, their edu-
cational institutions, their parochial privileges, their
physical and intellectual necessities, their political
rights, and social and moral advancement, are ob-
jects of solicitude to those able and willings to help
them. As a step towards these objects, a powerful
interest was at work to secure for the working men
an • occasional Sunday at Sydenham. But, un-
doubtedly, the hypothesis on which they acted was,
not that the Lord's-day was a mere human institu-
tion ; not that its solemnities might be put aside
for mere intellectual substitutes ; not that there
was no obligation on the conscience of Christian
men to keep it holy ; but that there was no neces-
sary violation of its sanctity in a quiet visit to the
Crystal Palace ; that such a visit was quite compa-
tible with the fulfilment of religious duties ; that
some recreation working men must have ; that they
could have it on no. other day ; and that, in default
of bettor, they were in a measure forced to take up
with such as London streets afford, and which are
amongst the worst that could be set before them.
On this broad, benevolent, and Christian view, a
large body are prepared to support the cause, and
ourselves amongst the number ; but we disavow
cx animo the heathenish terms of tho declaration
passed the other evening, and we ask the working
men, for their own sake and the- truth's sake, to
disavow it, too. They must otherwise be prepared
to lose the strong support they have hitherto received
in this object from so many quarters; for, assuredly,
a vast majority will consider as we do, that it were
far better the Crystal Palace be closed every Sun-
day in the year than opened but once on such prin-
ciples.

(From the Morning Advertiser.)

We are glad to observe that public attention is
being directed, in the various metropolitan parishes,
to the Bishop of London's bill, taken into Parlia-
ment by the Bishop of Salisbury, for the purpose
of making churchwardens the mere nominees of
the clergy, . and rendering the vestry meetings
throughout the country entirely subservient to the
clerical will. As it is certain that the Bishop of
London will—if he can—force this measure through
the Home of Lords during the approaching session,
it is incumbent on all who value their parochial
freedom, and are not disposed to place increased
power in the hands of the bishops and the clergy, to
employ their most active efforts to agitate this
question throughout the length and breadth of the
land, and convince " Charles James" and his order
that their attempt is thoroughly understood, and
that the people of England are not in a humour
for any further concesions.
The inhabitants of St. Pancras have just held
their meeting, with the object of opposing the
further introduction of this rapacious measure into
Parliament, and their proceedings have been con-
ducted with a degree of intelligence and energetic
determination which, if imitated in every parish in
the land, or throughout London, and all our large
towns, would convince his Lordship of London
that he has ",taken nothing by his motion."
St. Pancras, indeed, has reasons of its own to be
vigilant in reference to this new movement, having
suffered so severely in consequence of being under
the control of a self-elected and irresponsible body.
The Church Trustees, to whom we refer, it appears
from the statement of a churchwarden of St.
Pancras, Mr. Billet have, during the 33 years of
their existence evjended 200,0001. of the parish
money. We believe few parishes have had more
reason to complain of the manner in which they
have been mulcted for the support of the church,
and particularly for the erection of the elegant pa-
rish church in the New-road, which, while it is a
monument of classic taste, is to many of the rate-
payers a constant memorial of heavy taxation, to
which they have been compelled to submit.
It should be understood that the bill of the Bishop
of London, if it should become law, will put it out
of the power of the parishioners to prevent them-
selves from being taxed to any extent that may
comport with the liberal ideas of the episcopal lord.
He is well known to have a large heart wherever
he can find a large purse to correspond with its dili-
tations. Liberal to his own family in the me of
his patronage, he delights also in the increase of his
power to give good incumbencies to his High
Church proteges, and if this business of the church-
wardens can only be managed, his noble soul will
be rejoiced in the certain increase of churches, and
the power of giving them away to the large crowd
of relatives and expectants, who are naturally look-
ing to him for something good, before his day is
gone by.
The churchwardens, it should be recollected, are
the only barrier to the re-imposition of church rates,
to any required amount, and, as was observed at
the St. Pancras meeting, if the right of electing the
churchwardens is to be taken from the people, that
parish will not be long without a perp3tual church
rate.

This is just the time for the expression of public
opinion on the attempt to annihilate the power of the
churchwardens. Itis said that the Bishop of London
has bad the modest assurance to ask for the opi-
nion of the various parishes on his measure. We
could scarcely have believed that his Lordship
would have had the temerity to make such a re-
quest ; some men, however, are so blinded by am-
bition, and so courageous from success, that there
is scarcely anything they will not attempt, and
hope to succeed in. However, as his Lordship
has the boldness to ask for public opinion on his
new hobby, let him have it by all means and from
all quarters.
Let the Bishop of London be told from every
parish in England that the parishioners have duly