The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-18 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY.

LADY HEWLEY'S CHARITY.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. SHORE.
(Continued from The Sun of yesterday.)
Mr KNIGHT said, taking it as proved, that Lady Hewley
believed in the doctrine of the atonement and original sin,
and the Trinity, then there was an end of the question at
issue, both with respect to law and fact. Now, then, did
the persons who now administer the charity believe as Lady
Hewley believed ? That was the question. Among the
many startling things he had heard in the course of those
proceedings was the assertion that the religious doctrines of
the trustees were immaterial. If this were so there could
be no reason for rejecting the Papist or the member of the
Greek Church, for to that it might readily come. They
had, and he (Mr. Knight) regretted to say it, great difficulty
in bringing Mr. Wellbeloved and his coadjutors to state
what their religious opinions really were ; but after much
•

fencing they at length extracted from the theological tutor
of Manchester college, a string of texts, from which his real
principles might be gathered. He says, "he desires to be
considered a Protestant Dissenter of the Presbyterian de-
nomination, and as one who believes in the divine mission of
Christ, and holds no other doctrines than those contained

in Christ's Holy Gospel, to all of which he yields a full and
cordial assent ; that in using the term Unitarian, as appli-
cable to himself, the means that he professes the fol-

lowing doctrines :—That to know God to be the true
God, and Jesus Christ's, whom he has sent, is eter-
nal life ; that it is his duty to worship God accord-
ing to the precepts and example of his divine Lord
and Master, who taught his disciples to pray to God, their
father in heaven, and to ask of him what they needed in his

name ; that it is his duty to ascribe glory to the only true
God through Jesus Christ ; that he acknowledges Christ
to be the Word that in the beginning was with God ;'
and that he bath sent his only begotten Son into the world,
that the world through him might be saved," &c. The de-
fendant goes on to say that he does not in his chapel preach
the doctrines of any particular sect, and that he does not
know the doctrines of his congTegation, because he never
inquired. The other defendants refer to the exposition of
faith made by Wellbeloved. Now, it was obvious that
Wellbelovod took the text of Scripture for his guide, but
that he reserved to himself the right of the interpretation to
be put on these texts. He believed in the Bible, but, it
was in his own interpretation of the Bible ; the only ques-
tion at issue being as to the method of expounding the
Bible. Mr. Wellbeloved might have spared himself the
trouble of collecting his texts, when the only question was
how those questions were to be construed. But then Mr.
Wellbeloved had a way of getting out of the difficulty. He
believed in the Bible, but it was a Bible of his own ; in
which, by means of turning e,og into oc, and some other
slight liberties of that kind, he made the whole text corre-
spond with his peculiar creed. He (Mr. Knight) saw no
difficulty in making the Koran, on the same plan, a perfectly
orthodox work, if there was no obstacle in the personal cha-
racter and morality of Mahomet. In the catalogue of
works circulated under the direction of the British and Fo-
reign Unitarian Society, their Lordships would find first on
the list, " The New Testament, in an improvod version, on
the basis of Archbishop Newcomp's new translation, with a
corrected text, and notes, critical and explanatory, cor-
rected according to the last text of Griesbach, with addi-
tional notes." This was the Unitarian version of the Scrip-
tures.

YM.
The LORD CHANCELLOR asked if the books of the So-
ciety were given away ?
Mr. KNIGHT—NO. They were sold at lower prices for
distribution, in the same manner as the other societies dis-
tributed tracts. The Vice-Chancellor had commented on
this version of the Scriptures with great critical acumen
and ability. He (Mr. Knight) should not attempt to go
into the same field, but merely content himself by referring
their Lordships to the following version in that book of that
well known Epistle to the Hebrews. That chapter, in the
improved version of the Unitarians, is rendered tis fAllows ;
Epistle to the Hebrews, chap. 1, " dod, who in several
parts and in several manners formerly spoke to our fathers by
his Son, whom he bath appointed heir of all things, for whom
he constituted the ages ; wbo, being a ray of his brightness,
and an image of his perfections, and ruling all things by his
powerful word, when he had by himself made a cleansing of
our sins, sat dRIIII °P.* rig* hqfd.,pf the Majesty an high;
having been made so much greater than those 'messengers, as
he bath obtained a more excellent name than they. For, to
which of those messengers spoke God at any time, • Thou art

y Sea, this day I have adopted thee,' and again, ' I will be
o him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son.' And when
od bringeth again the First-born into the world he saith,
i And let all the messengers of God pay homage to him.' "
Now, their Lordships would mark in this piece of trans-
tation b't 0,..) was for the first time translated for whom, and
1
,r vrg— eza-i,, perfections. No ordinary fourth-form boy at
i •
any of our public schools could have fallen into such a
jranslation : and he (Mr. Knight) declared most solemnly,
that if any son of his had attempted to make such a trans-
lation, he would have insisted on his being publicly flogged
cor his stupidity. To use the language of the Vice-Chan-
lellor, the Unitarians, in putting forth such a thing as a
translation of the Scriptures, gave the world a creed under
the guise of a translation. Their Lordships would find
that other passages were similarly mutilated, as if it was
thought that before Trinitarianism could be changed into
Cnitarianism, a version of the Scriptures must be made on
purpose. But the servants of Mr. Wellbeloved (if any
further proof were wanting) would show the nature of the
doctrines which that gentleman and his friends wished to
promulgate. In a discourse spoken in aid of the fund for
liaising a Unitarian chapel at Calcutta, the Reverend Gen-
tleman expressly says, on the 23d January, 1835, " that
he cannot bring himself to believe the Almighty would
. brin any of his rational children into the world to be
s 0
aved solely by a particular mode of belief." In an-
cither sermon, preached at Bow Alley Chapel, in the
town of Hull, in the year 1823, the Reverend Gentleman
gives utterance to these expressions (the Act against blas-
phemy, it will be recollected, being repealed in 1811) :
'1 We see nothing in the pages of the Old or New Testa-
ment to justify the doctrines which are generally received
as orthodox, as relating to original sin, the total corruption
4 human nature, the moral impotency of men, or the
means of obtaining the Divine favour. We cannot adopt
them, because they appear unsupported by authority of
§cripture ; nor the notions relative to the doctrine of atone-
Tent, and much less those concerning satisfaction, imputed
righteousness, and the efficacy of the merits of Christ."
These last words are, it will be seen, the very expressions
used in the will. He then goes on to observe that he rejects
them as decidedly adverse to the word of God ; and thus
speaks of his own sect :—" Of us, certainly, all do not
speak well. Few, indeed, can be found who do not say of
us all manner of evil. Beyond our own narrow, but daily-
increasing school, no one biddeth us ' God speed,' or holdeth
out the hend of Christian fellowship ; but many are they
who hate us, reproach us, and separate' us from their com-
pany, and cast out our name as evil." He then pro-
ceeds—" But it will be said we deny his Deity, we refuse
to acknowledge him as the second person of the God-
head. We do not allow him to be one God with
the Father, co-eternal and co-equal, or even God of God.
We confess the man Christ, but we deny him as that suffer-
ing, incarnate, and dying God which he is believed to have
been by all persons who bear his name. True, we do deny
the Jesus of the Nicene and Athanasian creeds, of the con-
Cessions of faith adopted by the Christian Churches, but let
no one on this account apply the language of St. Peter in
Ty text, until he has proved that the doctrine of these
creeds on this point is indeed the doctrine of the New Tes-
tament." Those were the published opinions of Mr. Well-
beloved, the professor of theology in Manchester College.
There was another sermon published by Dr. Kenrick, the
classical tutor in the same College, but as their Lord-
ships would hear it in evidence he should not now
advert to it. Mr. Wellbeloved spoke of the daily in-
Crease of his narrow circle, but he (Mr. Knight)
thought he had not shown enough of the nature of his
doctrines to secure the removal of those funds which
had hitherto contributed so effectively to ' enlarge that
Circle. When withdrawn that circle would probably
begin to recontract itself to its natural and proper
limits. Mr. Wellbeloved was the tutor of theology in
Manchester College. Mr. Kenrick was the classical tutor.
What did their Lordships require more? But then they
said the doctrines of the College were Presbyterian ; that
every student was left to form his own private judgment
on points of doctrine, and that nothing was inculcated but
a love of truth. The inculcation of Unitarianism was de-
nied, but such were the consequences of instruction in Man-
chester College.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—How many tutors are there?
Mr. KNIGHT.—Three ; Wellbeloved, Kenrick, and a
Mr. Hincks, all Unitarians. The evidence of Mr. Hinc4
it was his (Mr. Knight's) painful duty to say must be con-
sidered as anything but creditable to a man of fair charac-
ter, for he had founded all his answers on an alleged in-
ability to understand the meaning attached to the name of
Unitarian. His answers were, however, a specimen of the
whole of the evidence, and as such he noticed it. He was,
however, about to speak of the education at Manchester
College—
The LORD CHANCELLOR—What is the result of it ?

Mr. KNIGHT—The result is, my Lord, that although
we are told no particular doctrines are inculcated, yet, with
few exceptions, the whole of the pupils come forth Unita-

mans.

Mr. BARON ALDERSON—The result, I suppose is, that
they go as they are guided, although they are said to be left
alone.

Mr. KNlGHT—Precisely, my Lord.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Are any of the funds of the
charity applicable to the purposes of the college ?
Mr. KNIGHT—Yes, my Lord.
, Mr. ROLFE—No, my Lord.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Yes and no. Which is it ?
Mr. KNIGHT—I say yes. It has the benefit of the ex-
hibitions at twenty pounds each. Mr. Wellbeloved's salary
was 2781., and yet he received 801. as a godly preacher of
the gospel from the Hewley charity. To this College, too,
the trustees were subscribers, as was established by the re-
ports of its proceedings ; and it was also a remarkable fact,
that although Mr. Wellbeloved denied that he belonged to
any class of Christians, yet a circular written by him is ap-
pended to one of those reports ; and in that circular he en-
joins exertions to preserve a regular succession of ministers
of " our" class of Dissenters, by procuring an increase of
the subscriptions to Manchester College.

The LORD CHANCELLOR here said it was within a quar-
ter of three o'clock, and he must attend the Church Com-
mission at three. They would, however, go on to-morrow
morning.
Mr. KNIGHT said he feared he had yet work for an hour
and a half longer.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.