The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-12-16 00:00:00

THL LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE LIVERPOOL

TOWN COUNCIL.

GIiNTLEURN,—Under the heads of translation and notes, I
have already given you some of our strong objections to the
books, erroneously called Scripture lessons, which are used in
your schools. On the subject of translation I have now to add,
that in the lesson-boo► professing to contain the Gospel of St.
Luke, the variations from the authorised version amount to urge
thousand six hundred and eighty; and in the lesson-book of the
Acts of the Apostles, the variations are one thousand nine hun-
dred and six. Many of these are necessarily immaterial aS to
the meaning of the sentence; but, in the aggregate, they give
to-the books (books professing to be Scripture) the aspect and
sound of complete novelty. I have already shown how unfair
this is itself, and how disastrous it is calculated to be in its
consequences.
a. We object to these books, in the third place, because they
eletrate the Dona), versio❑ of the Old Testament, and the
Rheimish version of the New Testament, (these two compose
what is commonly called the Douay Bible,) into a position of
parallel authority with our authorised version.
In the preface to No. I we are informed that " the transla-
tion has been made by a comparison of the authorised and
Douay versions, with the original." In the subsequent num-
bers, the words of the Rheimish translation are frequently
adopted; in St. Luke above six hundred times, in the Acts of
the Apostles above five hundred, and the notes contain numer-
ous references to the Rheimish version. Thus it appears, that
the combined sources from whence the lesson-books profess to
be derived are the authorised version without note or comment,
and the Douay version with hboth notes and comments, a leaning
of preference being manifestly given to the latter. Most of the
notes appended to the lessons are original, containing many
unauthorised statements of doctrine, of private and ex parte
interpretation. To the existence of notes at all, in books forced
into use as these are, we object, as an unfair rejection of the
great Protestant principle, and adoption of the invariable
Rol:nigh practice.
It is quite possible that, beyond this, no objection may occur to
your minds against the equality of authority claimed for the
Douay and authorised versions. On the contrary you may
be disposed to inquire, why should they not be treated as of
-equal authority? In reply to this, it will be useful to revive a
few historial reminiscences concerning the translations made at
Douay and Rheims. These will materially assist us in forming
-a correct estimate of the value of time translations themselves.

I have already called your attention to the history of our
-authorised version, and to the high testimonies in approbation
of it, compiled by Mr. Horne. To these I will add no more
than the tribute of Mr. Southey, who calls it " a truly admira-
ble translation, wherein, after the great advances which have
been made in oriental and Biblical learning, no error of main
importance has been discovered."—Book of the Church, vol. 2,
page 337.
dear now the history of the Douay Bible. The founder of
the colleges at Douay and Rheims, and the chief translator
of the Itheimish Testament, was Dr. William Allen. lie was
an Englishman ; but for multiplied acts of treason, was com-
pelled to fly from his country. He went to Flanders, where he
exercised all the powers of his mind, and they were Teat, to
check, and if possible to overthrow, the progress a the'Protes-
tent Reformation in England. He became a pensioner of the
King of Spain, and was created cardinal by the Pope. He
laboured to orrupt the soldiery of England, and succeeded its
tempting Sir William Stanley to betray Daventer, in Holland,
to the Spaniards. In concert with the Jesuit Parsons, he de-
vised the scheme of the Spanish invasion of England, in the
celebrated " Invincible Armada." He was patronised by the
infamous Duke de Guise, who, with _Catherine de Medicis,
planned. the massacre of tens of thousands of Protestants, on
St. Bartholomew's day : and he was the willing instrument of
Gregory XIII, who appointed a public thanksgiving at Rome,
for the success of the above mentioned slaughter. Cardinal
Allen sent Jesuits into England, to taint. the principles of the
people. The pupils in the colleges he founded were taught all
manner of ways to dicide Protestants in principles of religion;
and were themselves bound by an oath, of which the following
is a copy :
" I, A. 8., do acknowledge the ecclesiastical and political
powew of his Holiness and the mother church of Rome as the
-chief head and matron above all pretended churches, through
the whole earth. And that my zeal shall be for St. Peter and
his successors, as the founder of the true and ancient Catholic
faith, against all heretical kings, princes, states, or powers,
repugnant unto the same. And although I, A. 8., may pretend,
in case of persecution, or otherwise, to be heretically disposed, yet,
in soul and conscience, I shall help, aid, and succour the mother
church."—S trype's Anuals, ii, part 2, p. 237.
" In the year 1582, the Roinanists finding it impossible to
withhold the Scriptures any longer from the common people,
printed an English New Testament at Rheims; it was trans-
lated, not from the original Greek, but from the Latin Vulgate.
The editors (whose names are not known) retained the words
azynius, tunike, holocaust, pasche, and a multitude of the Greek
words untranslated, under the pretext of wanting proper and
adequate English terms, by which to reader them, and thus con-
trived to reader it unintelligible to common readers. Hence the
historian Fuller t,ok occasion to remark that it was a "trans-
lation which needed to be translated," and that its editors, "by
all means laboured to suppress the light of truth under one pre-
tence or other." Our learned countryman, Thomas Cartwright,
was solicited by Sir Francis Walsinghain to refute this transla-
tion,-but after he had made considerable progress in the work,
he was prohibited from proceeding further by Archbishop Whit-
gift, who judging it improper that the defence of the doctrine of
the Church of England should be committed to a puritan, ap-
pointed Dr. William Fulke in his place. By him the divines
of Rheims were refuted with great spirit and ability. Fulke's
work appeared in 1617, and in the following year, Cartwright's
confutation was published under the auspices of Archbishop
Abbot; both of them were accompanied with the Rheimish
translation of the New Testament. The Old Testament was
translated from the Vulgate at Douay, (whence it is called the
Douay Bible,) in two volumes, 4to; the first of which appeared
in 1656, and the second in 1610. Annotations are subjoined,
which are ascribed to one Thomas Worthington ; the trans-
lators were William (afterwards Cardinal) Allen, Gregory
Martin, and Richard Bristow. This translation, with the
Rheimish version of the New Testament above noticed, forms
the English Bible, which alone is used by the Romanists of this'
country."—House's Introduction, vol. ii, p. 249, edit. v.
Archbishop Newcome has given the following rule (and wise
men will agree in esteeming it a wise rule) for conducting a trans-
lation of the Scriptures : " The translators should be philologists,
-not controversialists." The reverse or this is notoriously true
concerning the Douav and Rheimish translators. They were,
...a uvic* pi
unscrupulous controversialists. They gave such violent ex-
pression to their opinions, that even the Church of Rome her-
self has never since so far thrown off the mask as to give the
imprimatur of her avowed and authoritative sanction to their
productions.
The Rheimish Testament, with its intolerant notes, was re-
published in Dublin, in 1816, " corrected 'revised, and approved"
by the.most Rev. Dr. Troy, R. C. Archbishop. Itwas reviewed
with well-merited severity by the British Critio,(N.S.) vol. viii,
p. 296-308. After this review had attracted public attention,
and excited public indignation in England, Dr: Troy published
a dislaimer of the notes "as harsh and irritating in expression,
some of them false and absurd in reasoning, and many of them
as uncharitable in sentiment."

Such is the book which is elevated into an equality of estima-
tion with our authorised version,—which is referred to conti-
nually with approbation in the lessons now in your schools.—and
against which, whether in the matter of translation, or in the
contents of the notes, not one syllable of disapprobation is ever
whispered by the Irish board ! Is not our charge of unfairness
against those lessons fully established? And ought not Pro-
testants to be loudly warned of the precipice on the brink of
which their dear children must stand, if permitted to enter those
schools, and to have-their opening minds familiarised with those

disastrous books?
Did Dr. Murray, as a member of the Irish board, claim for
the Rheimish Testament, without any pointed and prominent
protest against the notes, an authority parallel to the authority
we claim for our version ? This is an interesting inquiry. If he
did, what becomes of his disclaimer, his indignant, his sworn
disclaimer of those notes ? If be did not, what shall be said of
the voluntary exuberance of liberality in the Protestant
members of the board, advancing an ultra-Popish version into
a position which even the Church of Rome does not claim for
it ? And what shall be said of the impartial meekness of Dr.
Murray in allowing that version to be so unduly honoured by
the overflowing good-nature of his Protestant coadjutators?
4. We object to these books fourthly, because they distinctly
inculcate many of the unscriptural doctrines of the Church of
Rome. I shall adduce three instances : first, on the fanciful
locality which Roman Catholics are taught to call purgatory;
secondly, on their undue exaltation of the Virgin Mary; and,
thirdly, on the supposed sacrifice of the mass. Clearly to per-
ceive the nature and extent of the mischief accomplished in
these books, by expressions of apparently little consequence, it
is absolutely necessary to be in some degree acquainted with
the state of the controversy, as it has long existed, on the vital
differences between Popery and Christianity. This must
prove my excuse for what may appear to some of you to be tedi-
ous.

Purgatory.—Gregory Martin uses these words as the heading
of one of his chapters,—" Heretical translation against purga-
tory, Limbos Patrum, Christ's descending into hell." He af-
terwards states "their (the reformers') principal malice being
against purgatorie. that is, against a place where Christians'
souses should be purged by suffering of temporal pains after this
life, for since maintenance of their erroneous denial thereof,
they take away and denie all third places, saying, that there
Uever was, from the beginning of the world, any other place for
armies, after this life, but only two, to witte, heaven for the
blessed, and hell fur the damned."—p. 196.
In proof of this charge, that the Reformers corrupted the text,
in order to avoid any translation which might countenance the
notion of purgatory, he alleges that, instead of translating
Genesis xxxvii. 35, as it is in the Donay7—" I will j,;() down_
to my on into hel,"(or the place of the dead) mourning," they
translated it—" I will go down into the grave, unto my son,
mourning."
The ground here taken in proof of the heretical translation
of the Scriptures by Protestants, is, that they render, by the ap-
propriate phrase the grave," that which in the Burnish ver-
sions is rendered "hel," or, "the place of the dead." The
translation of the word in one way is deemed heretical; in the
other it is considered as affording evidence .of the existence of
a place besides heaven and hell, to which the souls of the de-
parted are consigned. Under these circumstances, it will be
interesting to observe which of the two modes of translation the
Commissioners of Irish Education have selected. For this
purpose I shall now give the passage in which the disputed
Iroyd occurs, in the authorised version, the Douay, and the Irish
iesSons.

For I will go down

Authorised versions.—Gen. xxxvii, 35.
into the grave unto my son, mourning.
Douay.—l will go down to my sou to hel mourning,
Lesswoe.-1 will go down to nay son to the place of the dead
.mourning. _ . .

Here he Protestant translation, the g; ace, is avoided; and
the Roman Catholic explanation, the place of the dead, is
.adopted. And thus the Irish lessons are fairly freed from what
Gregory Martin calls the " heretical translation against purge-
torie, Limbos Patrum, &c." On the contrary, they contain a
4ranslation conceding all that the Church of Rome has Con-
tended for upon this point. And these are the books prepared
:for the lianas of Prdtestant Children !—See Dr. Newland's
'Biarnination, &c.
. The Virgin Mary.—ln the preface to the Lessons from St.
Luke, we ale inform4d—" It (this number) contains the whole
of,the Gospel of St. Luke." Yet there is an omission of ten
verses from the first
This of itsnif• chapter, the 27th to the end of the 37th.
,Ttitse extraordinary. But what do the omitted verses
contain?
Angel Gabriel' teontain, among other things, the address.of the
oinittd t Beeauose the
Virgin :daffy. W hYshould this he
of
tahedoes not contain the celebrated
cal salutation" " angeli- !,
grace! To have script church—Hail, Mary, full of
u this into the text, without even one
convenient manuscrip
too daring a step even fur (et: T in itg favour, would have been
gel
rezhdflgard. On the ol%ter hand,
to introduce what the angel read t. say in his own words, to .
the exclusion of Hail, Mary,
I.:men treason against
s• ; Kornitb prejudice. A most ingenioug'dee
a.arestantnzs or bereav-
cult.__V,wittsuut either-glarming superficial P,ce gat rid of the di
in, -pcolnam, Catholics of their darling
was not 'frapslated at all, but paraphrased in am. tthe Passage
omitted ferieti,, , 0 austract of the
The effeCrOf thisis worthy of attention.
.. - . At the end of each lesson in these books, there is a list of.

questions referring to the matter of the lesson; by these questions
the master impresses the substance of the lesson on the attention
of the children. In the list after the lesson now before us, these
questions occur. " How did the angel address her?" " What
more did he say to her ?" To these there is no direct answer
in the words of the lessun. The child naturally pauses for the
master's help. How is the master to help the child? Is he to
give the scriptural answer, and suppress the Hail, Mary? Or
is he to give the Roman Catholic answer, and suppress the
Word of God ? Or is he to give both answers ? Or is he to
give no answer? Is he to tamper with his own conscience, and
evade any peculiar religious instruction, whatever his own con-
scientious opinions may be ? Or is he to have no conscience of
his own, that be may be an accommodating instrument of the
new system ? The best system of education that ever was, or
can be, devised, can never work well without faithful, conscien-
tious, and inteliigent masters; and masters of such a character,
are, by these books, placed in a predicament of intolerable
hardship.
The masters may be, in Ireland most of them are, Roman
Catholics. How will such mast. rs help the children in such
circumstances? What answer will they give? Undoubtedly
they will say, " Hail, Mary, fall of Grace!" and thus they will.
teach Protestant children what the Word of God does not con-
tain, but what is a tradition of the Church of Rotue.
The sacrifice of the mass.

In the passages of Scripture where the institution of the
Lord's Supper is given by Christ, and repeated by St. Paul, the
language is in the present tense. It is to this effect in all, and
in these words in one This is my body, which is given for I
you ; this do in remembrance of me. This cup is my blood. of I
the New Testament, which is shed for you." In the Rheimish
version of the New Testament, an alteration is made in the lat-
ter part of the sentence. It stands thus: "This chalice is my
blood of the New Testament, which shall be shed for you." On
this difference between the present and the future tense, Ro-
man Catholics, so far as they refer to Scripture for authority,
build the doctrine of an unbloody sacrifice. They tell us that
Christ then and there gave his body; for he says, "it is given;"
therefore then and there was an unbloody sacrifice. But that,
in the second clause, there was a reference to the sacrifice on
the cross, therefore it is put in the future tense, and not in the
present—" it shall be shed for you."
Thus Harding, in his controversy with Bishop Jewel, says,
that " Christ offered and sacrificed his body and blood twice ;
first, in the holy supper, unbloudily; and afterwards on the
cross, with shedding of blood." The bishop answers him :
" Wherefore, whereas Mr., Harding saith, only upon his own
warrant, that Christ realie sacrificed himselfe at two sundry
times, first at the table, and afterwards upon the cro3se : the
untruth and folly hereof is easily reproved by these plain words
of St. Paul, Semel oblatus est, ad multortirn exhaurienda
peccata ; and againe, With one sacrifice he hath made perfect
them for ever that he sanctified.' rhese places are cleare and
without question, unless Mr. Harding will say that one and two
and once and twice be both one thing."—Jeivel's Walks, 1,611,
vol. ii. p. 417.
The original language, and the analogy, of Scriptural truth,
are in favour of the uniformity of tense. The change of tense,
wholly unauthorised by the original, is the apparent ground
for the Burnish- doctrine. We now turn to the lessons, and
there we find the change• of tense. " This cup is the New
Testament which is about w be shed for you!"
The history of the connexion between this translation and a
passage in Lord Stanley,s 'original letter to the Duke of
Leinster upon the subject dale new system is very interesting.
His lordship wrote " The commissioners of education in 1824-5,
* * * hoped to have been able to agree upon a selection
from the Scriptures, which might have been generally acquisced
in by both parties. But it was found impracticable."
The fact is that the change of tense in the passage now under
consideration, which was a point that the Roman Catholic pre-
lates would by no means forego, was a point which the present
Primate and the late Archbishop of Dublin would by no means
allow. Agreement was found to be impracticable. Dr. Murray
was too faithful to the Council of Trent and Dr. Magee too
faithful to the Holy Scriptures to admit of the possibility of
agreement. The present Archbishop of Dublin, however, and
his Protestant coadjutors at the board have come to an agree-
ment with Dr. Murray. They have agreed to admit the Romish
translation into books intended for national schools; and you,
gentlemen, have, unwarily I trust, agreed to put the books so
translated into the hands of Protestant children.
I have thus endeavoured to give a brief, and I deeply feel a
very inadequate, view of the unfairness of the Irish lesson books.
They contain a new translation, introducing needless and mis-
chievous uncertainty as to what is scripture. They abound in
notes of private interpretation, thereby rejecting a fundamental
principle of Protestantism and adopting the invariable practice,
of the Romish church. They elevate into equal authority with
our authorised version an unauthorised version made by men
who were at the time notoriously active, zealous, and unscru-
pulous partisans. And they inculcate, both by translation and
notes, most objectionable Roman Catholic doctrines.
Yet, in the face of all this, we are assured in the preface that
" nothing is more remote from the intention of the commission-
ers than to offer them (the lessons.) as a substitute for the whole
Bible; or to seek to supersede, re; ANY DEGREE, by means of
them, the authorised version of the Established Church.
It is certainly difficult to discern the harmony between this
profession in the preface and the practice which follows in the
books.

It is possible, gentlemen, that some of you may feel impatient
under this discussion ; and I do, indeed, • readily acknowledge
that it is wholly unsuited to your habits and pursuits; but excuse
me, when I remind you that you have brought it upon your-
selves; and that it would be highly inconsistent in any of you
who have advocated so essential a change in the system, of edu-
cation for the poor, to complain of, or shrink from, the inevitable
consequences of your own proceedings.
Remonstrance and opposition on our part were inevitable
aonsequences. We sincerely grieve over the divisions and dis-
sentions which could not fail to result therefrom : but the interests
of the truth of God occupy a higher place in our estimation than
even peace amongst men. If we were in uncertainty as to what
is truth, we might then treat all opinions with indiscriminate
complacency, and speak, or not speak, as seemed most expe-
dient. But we are not in uncertainty. Believing the Bible, we
must speak as the Bible; although such speaking always has
been, and must still be, the means of detecting (not producing)
the latent enmity of man's natural mind against God's truth ;
and thereby of 'occasioning division, according to the prediction
of our Saviour, when he said suppose ye that 1 eon come to give
peace on earth? I tell you nay, but rather division, lye.—St. Luke,
xii, 51-53.
Notwithstanding this high Scriptural position, which should
commend itself to all, and especially to all conscientious mem-
bers of Bible aecieties. many ,of you seem to think it strange that
ins ciergy or tire rsstablisnect unurcn SBULtiU
_persevere in weir
opposition to this new system of education. In your debate on
the 23d of November, we are charged with shameful dereliction
of duty in not joining it : party zeal and religious bigotry are in-
sinuated as our actuating motives; we are described as your
natural enemies; and one eloquent councillor stigmatised our
opposition as the malignant howl of faction. The same speaker
described my first letter to you as breathina infamous persecu-
tion, and charged me with hurling the thunderbolts of omnipotent
vengeance. These expressions are strangely characteristic of
liberal gentlemen, who are so loud in the praises of charity and
meekness, and universal philanthropy. I do not quote for the
purpose of retort, but in justice to myself, to call attention to an
instructive contrast. 1 have never used, or fancied, (and I hope
I never shall,) any such expressions concerning any of you, as
those which have been Javishly, and with much applause, heaped
upon me in your Council. I do not complain. I merely wish
that our intelligent and unprejudiced townsmen may clearly
perceive the true bearing and legitnnate application of all future
charges of uncharitableness of temper, and violence of language.
I hope I may here, without offence, quote a paSsage from Mr.
Blackburn's speech, with which I entirely agree. He said,
"The noise the party made was no proof of their numbers, no
proof of their strength; on the contrary, violence and vehemence
were pretty plain indications of their want of power."
I shall now, in conclusion, assign some of those reasons which
render it impossible for us to sanction this new system.
First, as believers in the DIVINN COMMAND to bring up chil-
dren in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, we cannot
-sanction by our co-operation a system which does not ensure
and enforce the reading of the Word of God.
SeCondly, we cannot sanction this system, because it provides
' for the effectual hindering of the children of our poor Roman
Catholic fellow-countrymen, from the possibility of hearing the
Word of God. Their own guides will not, and we, if we join this
system, give a practical pledge that we will not, teach them the
pure Word of God. This we cannot do. It is our duty as far as
Meth in us, to avail ourselves of all practicable opportunities, to
teach the Word of God to all men without distinction. If some
will not receive our instruction, this is not our fault, but we can
never bind ourselves by any act of our own, to refrain from the
Scriptural instruction of any.. •
Thirdly, as ministers-of the Established Church, we cannot
sanction the system, because it directly inculcates doctrines
which we are solemnly pledged to oppose: We have been asked
with all solemnity before
God, and an assembled congregation;
will you be ready, will& all faitlyril diligence, to I:anish and drive
away all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's wind t
And we have each answered 1 will, the Lord being my helper.
We are not left in any doubt as to some of the doctrines in
question. Witharqual solemnity we have signed our assent to the
Articles of our Church, one of which says, " The Rantis,htlioo:concerningtrine concerning purgattwy, pardons, worshipping, ,„,1 ud,,at
as well of images as of yeliques, as also invocation of saints, is a
fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of
Scriptures; but rather repugnant to the Word of God.'' Article
xxii.
And another. says, It is .a thing plainly repugnant to the
Word of God, and the custom qf the Primitive Church, to have
public prayers in the Church. or to minister the sacraments, in a
tongue not understood by the people."—Article xxiv.
And another says, " Transubstantiation is repugnant to the plain
words of Scripture, overthrowetit the-nature of- a sacrament, and
liath given occasion to many SUPENSTITIONS."- Article xxviii.
Your school sYstein provides fur the teaching of these doe-
, trines—how then can we sanction it? How, upon your own
'principles of private jurrginent and liberty of conscience, can
you ask us to join in it, and so, by our co-operation, give prac-
tical expression to our approbation of it? How any clergyman
can do it, we cannot uuderstand ; but, for ourselves, we have
not so learned the English language as to interpret a solemn
pledge to give all diligence to banish and drive away Roman
Catholic doctrines, into a permission to join ourselves to the
working of such a system. You have aimed at a system in
which you designed to include all denominations; but light
and darkness cannot be blended, and therefore, the accomplish-
ment of such a design is impracticable. The old system re-
quired what operated as an exclusion of Roman Catholics.—
The new system requires what operates as an exclusion of Pro-
testants. In reference to the old system, you call the Roman
Catholics conscientiously scrupulous. In reference to the new
system you call us factiously bigotted. The truth is, however,
that we are conscientiously scrupulous, although yOur liberality
may not be large enough to believe us when we say so: Had
vou retained the former schools exclusively Protestant for the
Protestant 'population, and established aaditional schools ex-
clusively Roman Catholic for the Roman Catholic population,
this would have been' on your own principles, impartial. And,
however, we might have mourned over your indiscriminate pat 7
ronage of truth and error, we would not have practically inter-
fered. But when you unprotestantise the existing schools, and
still require us to attend them, and condemn us for not doing
so,—then, although as regards your condemnation we might
well be content to continue silent and unconcerned, as regards
the best interests of the children-of the poor, we cannot be
silent, because we cannot be unconcerned.
Be assured, gentlemen, the system which you have introduced
cannot proceed in peace. The new Protestant schools will soon
be in operation. The town will present this extraordinary as-
pect: two sets of public schools for the children of the poor,
one Protestant, the other Roman Catholic; the Protestant.
schools supported erairely by VOLlCtilly cuntributions--.-the Ro-
moman Catholic achools supported entirely by the corporate
funds. And this in a town whei~ the population is three-fourths
Protestant ! It is an arhosaaly, even on these lower principles,
the-permanence of which cannot reasonably be au Csipatecl. It
is. true you have at present a considerable majority on this ques-
tion—a majority, however, which was obviously enlarged by
treating the subject as a turning point of party politics. The
trues merits, of the questiou involve discussions. o hich are irk-
some to you, and with the details of which many of you are
confessedly not conversant. Then look at the majority on the
other side, among the clergy, who are, and win-se appropriate
calling is to be, conversant with the merits of this question.—
We are abovefi.fty to one agaiust the new system !
Gentlemen, I have now discharged the duty imposed upon
me, by Mr. Rithbone's mention of my name in his printed le:,

ter to you. There are other duties connected with this' subject
which I and my brother clergymen will not fail to continue to
discharge, and, I trust, with all fidelity and atlection.-1 am,
gentlemen, with much respect, your obedient servant.
HUGH APNEILE. .
St. Jude's, 13th Dec., 1836.

TO THE REV. DOCTORS DICKINSON AND WILSON,
DOMESTIC CHAPLAINS TO HIS GRACE THE
ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN.

Dublin, Dec, 5, 1833.

REV. GENTLEMEN,—Some time having elapsed since the pub-
lication of my letter to the Archbishop i7r Dublin, and not hav-
ing received any answer from either his Grace or Dr. Dickinson,
in explanation of their unwarrantable attack upon my charac-
ter, I now consider it my imperative duty to reply to your let-
ter which first appeared in the Saunders's of the • 28th of No-
vember; and though, gentlemen, great as has been my cause
for retaiation, still I trust that the same spirit which guided my
pen in my preceding letter, will influence my conduct in this,
and that no feelings of a personal nature will cause me to de-
scend
to acts unbecoming the character of a clergyman or un-
worthy of the name of a Christian. With regard to you, Mr.
Dickinson, notwithstanding the brevity of your letters, you have
fallen into some palpable errors—errors, perhaps, of no bad in-
tention upon your part, but which an impartial and discriminating
public consider as of no trivial importance. In your first epistle
upon the late inhibition affair, you have asserted that you would
make no further comment either "now or hereafter on the sub-
ject ;" and yet, with this statement before the public, and without
my having given you the least provocation, you come forward
with a second rejoinder to stamp upon my character one of your
most unjustifiable accusations. In the same letter you also
asserted that you would publish the whole of the correspondence
between the Archbishop and Archdeacon Magee, concerning
the inhibition ; and yet, by some unaccountable circumstance,
you omitted the principal letter on the occasion. In another of
your letters, you stated I called upon you to expostulate as to his
Grace having refused me leave to preach; whereas it was your-
self requested of me to call at your house at an appointed hour,
that you might explain the Archbishop's reasons fur having ex-
pressed to others his displeasure at my preaching at Lucan.
Again, in the same letter, you said when I was examined before
the Archbishop, (which is now' nearly three years ago,) that I
was found "miserably ignorant of the Scriptures," and conse-
quently then refused to preach ; whereas you told many clergy
men, whose names will be mentioned if require& that it was for
a deficiency in Greek I was unnatronised by his Grace. How
are such contradictions to be reconciled, Dr. Dickinson? With
regard to Dr. Wilson, I must say, that I never, in my recollec-
tion, saw that gentleman but once, about three weeks ago, at
Dr. Dickinson's house; though, from the tenor of his and Dr.
Dickinson's letter it would appear that Dr. Wilson was present
at the only interview I ever had with the Archbishop of Dublin.
Gentlemen, your joint letter says:—
" We thinl it right, therefore, to undeceive the public by a
simple statement of facts, which have come under our know-
ledge. The transaction alluded to is, in reality, totally uncon-
nected with anything relating to the Church of Rome, to its
doctrines, or to its members, considered as such.—The Arch.-
bishop proceeded exactly in the same manner in which he, and
it is to be presumed every other Bishop would, in the' case of an
individual brought up either in the Protestant or Roman Catholic
persuasion. Mr. Nolan having;seine time ago, appeared beforo
the Archbishop, applying for some 'clerical appointment, was
found on examination not to Poisess that knowledge which is
required for a candidate for Holly Orders." •
From the perusal of this extract it would appear that Dr.
Wilson was present during my interview with the Archbishop
• whereas the contrary is the fad. How will Dr. Wilson apolo-
gise for this description ? As for the other part of the extract
which says—" I was found, upon examination, rot to possess
that knowledge which is required in a candidate for holy orders,"
I roust say these expressions are a great falling off from the un-
justifiable attack made by the Archbishop and Dr. Dickinson
against me, as being miserably ignorant of the Scriptures; and
all this for my not having understood the meaning of a Greek
word!! ! In another part, gentlemen, of your joint letter, you
say :

--':ln an interview with us lately, Mr. Nolan admitted that he
was ignorant of the Scriptures at the period of the examination,
and that the Archbishop had acted rightly in refusing him leaVe
to preach. He added, that since that period he had acquired
religious knowledge. Of this the Archbishop had no opportu-
nits, of judging.'
Now, gentlemen, I will not call this a wilful suppression of
the truth ; but I must beg leave to rectify your mistake upon
the subject. I admitted that I did not understand the meaning
of the Greek word, at which the Archbishop exclaimed at my
examination, "Oh ! Maynooth ! Maynooth !" But such an
admission is different from what is generally meant by the ex-
pressions, " of a person being miserably ignorant of the Scrip-
tures, in my examination before the Archbishop, since he never
proposed to me a question even as to a knowledge of the truth
of the Scriptures, nor as to any historical, allegorical, or any
other definite passage in the word of God ? There is another
point, gentlemen, upon which yOu seem to have misunderstood
me, at my interview with both of you. You say that I also
admitted " that the Archbishop had acted rightly in ref Using
me leave to preach." Such an unqualified assertion as this,
gentlemen, carries with it its own refutation; for how could it
be supposed I admitted that the Archbishop was right in pro-
hibiting me from preaching, the very circumstance I most
heartily condemn, and upon the injudiciousness of which I
called (as Dr. Dickinson remarks) upon him to expostulate.
What I admitted to you. gentlemen, was this-1 said that if
the Archbishop examined me in the Scriptures, and found me
deficient in them, he would then have acted rightly in refusing
me leave to preach.
With regard to you, Dr. Wilson, I must say I would be sorry
to speak disreputably of you; however, as an apology for your
forgetfulness on the occasion alluded to becomes requisite, I
consider it necessary to remark, that you have arrived at that
period of time when the human intellect becomes obscured, and
when a forgetfulness of facts and a want of strict distinction as
to circumstances become necessary consequences of advanced
life. The justice of my remark may be easily conceived from a
recital of the following fact:—When I mentioned to you, Dr.
Wilson, at our interview, that I heartily forgave the last recep-
tion I met with from the Archbishop, but that I could not forget
it, you instantly and unceremoniously pronounced such conduct
inconsistent; as much as to say, that a person could not forgive
a thing without also forgetting it, or that forgiving and forget-
ting are the same! 1 ! The circumstances of your being domes-
tic chaplain to the Archbishop, and your having lately received
some distinguished, or rather extraordinary, marks of special
favour from his Grano.. pannnt hear (I orpanmel noon the pre-
sent subject. With regard to the part of your letter which says
" that the Archbishop had no opportunity of judging of the re-
ligious knowledge I acquired," I cannot conceive how you, Dr.
Dickinson, would recur to such an assertion, especially as your-
self was forced to admit at my interview with you and Dr." Wi-
lson 1 acquired that religious knowledge; whilst his Grace must
also have known the same circumstance from my writings, my
sermons, and the many testimonials his Grace received from
zealous and truly Christian clergymen. In another part of
your letter you assert that the Archbishop marked out for Mr.
Nolan a course of study. Pray, what were the books, or what
the course he marked out for me ? The Archbishop's directions
to me on the occasion were nothing more nor less than a cold
and a peremptory command to study the Greek, which circum-
stance (without mentioning the others before adduced) suf-
ficiently demonstrates that it was for what his Grace considered
a deficiency in the Greek, and not for "a miserable ignorance
of the Scriptures," Is was then discountenanced. Your letter
concludes with what the world esteems an indirect and miserable
apology to Dr. Murray and the Romish priests for having pro-
nour.ced a convert front their body as "miserably ignorant of
the Scriptures." But now, Dr. Dickinson, I call upon you and
the Archbishop to lay before the public the supposed scriptural
examination for which you pronounced me as "miserably igno-
rant of the Scriptures." Can you mention any scripturathis-
torical facts, any scriptural parables or allegories, or, in fine,
any scriptural passage you then proposed to me ? No, you can-
not : for you are well aware that it was a few quibbles upon
Romish Infallibility and a reference to a Greek passage that
constituted my examination, which occurred three years ago,'
and for which you now publicly upbraid me as being miserably.
deficient of the Scriptures.
In conclusion, gentlemen, allow me to say that my case is :no:
longer a private one. It has long since become one pablici ju,
ris. The eyes of many are on it, and earnestly look to its is-
sue. Though an humble individual, a dangerous blow has been
aimed—l will not say intentionally—and a grievous wound
sought to be inflicted upon the holy cause of religion. Hun-
dreds of Roman Catholics who were wavering in their faith,
and puritiing the road of religious inquiry, now halt in their.
course, and stand alarmed at sour conduct. The dread of per-
secution from those whom they intended to leave on one hand,
and the fear of similar treatment front those with whom they
were about to unite on the other, must naturally torture: the wa-.
yering mind, and leave it in the most miserable state of fearful
suspense, Gentlemen, it is time that personal feeling should
yield to a sense of public utility; come forward, then, and en-
deavour to make some reparation for the injuriesinfligted, not.
so much upou me as an individual, as upon the cause of reli-
gion. I should in charity hope that 'yours is 4.lthe perverse
ambition to resemble those who are the mere nimAinalprofcssors
of the faith—who would embrace the gospel with ',))nra-liand and
stab its religion with the other; or who would endeavour to
persuade the world by their words, that they love the truth,
whilst their actions aim at the extinction of its most vital prin-
ciples. Hoping, gentlemen, that the Lord may direct you in
your intentioos, I remain your much persecutej, but still yOur
humble well-wisher in Christ, L. J. NOLAN.

DESTRUCTION OF LOUGHTON-HALL, ESSEX,

BY FIRE,

We regret to state, that Laughton hall, the seat of Mr. Wm..
Whittaker Maitland,' the High 'Sheriff for the county of Essex,
was yesterday morning, with the exception of a portion of the
t sern
sio wing, totally destroyed by tire, and property" to the
unt of between £2o,ooo__ arid f.,...,:1it(..Xi0 ,_ c what
' consumed. From
,', haVe been able
one
collect, it appears, that about 5 o'clock
c, ll
yesterday mornineof the female domestics observed a dense
body of smoke in the west wing of the building, and, knowing
there was no fire in any part of the mansion, she became
alarmed, and immediately communicatedservants
her suspicions to the
family. Some of the sery s
toprobceeded to the library, and on
opening the door discovered it
nil. flames. In a few seconds •
the whole of the wing was one bodye Some of the house-
hold went for the Loughran engine, which speedily on the
spot, as also were the neighbou,s, who every
in their power; anti although there was
water, obtained from the ponds in the vicinity, iotnwhaEssiusipeanpbbellafly:csehkoc,if
ineffec-
tual Two of the servants came up .'to London
and reached the head station of the London Fire
ment, Watling-street, at eight o'clock, when Henderson and six
men with an engine, to which were attached four post-horses
and Crookland and six men withthe engine--from JA.tv's '
square, also with four horses, left their respective stations s;,ncl-
reached Loughton about 'lO o'clock,' button late to save' any
portion of the West wing. Finding•ir useless to attempt to stop
the progress of the flames in the above quarter; they directed
their attention to the eastern part of the building, and, ilthouoth
they used every exertion, we are sorry to say that they succeeded
in saving but a small portion. • .
The extent of the building may be imagined when we state
that 50 rooms were destroyed anti damaged. Amongst the pro-
perty burnt were upwards of 10,000 volumes of valuable books,
comprising a quantity of scarce works, many of them unique,
and with a few exceptions the whole of the. valuable furniture
was also destioyed. In the cellars are between 7,000 and 8,000,
dozens of wine,. which are supposed to he destroyed. L During
the whole of yesterday the various engines Were kept in play
without intermission, and a (7reat 'nuinber of persons from the
neigh ..ourhocid were engaged to work them. We are happy to
state that the whole of property is insured in the Imperial
Fire-office, of which Mr. Maitland is a director, as also one of
the dire'clors of the West India Docks. The- fife, which was
purely accidental, appears to have' conmence i d mpt hp flue of the
library chimney, which is supposed to contain some
.Wood-Work,
and to have been burning for some days part. 'No lives were
lost. Great praise is due to the countrymen who-assisted at the
engines for the extraordinary eXeriions which they made in
saying what little of the property escaped the devouring element.
Last night a reinforcement of the Men belOtiging , the London •
Fire Establishment was sent off to-aA'Sist thOse•who went down
with the engines, as time fire was still burning, and further dam-
age apprehended. The property saved was carried ou to the
lawn, and placed nnder the care of some of the principal inha-
bitants. The faMily 'a'n'd Set vants were accommodated at the
houses of persons residing in the vicinity of the place.-- Zmu.

COMMERCIAL INTELLIGENCE.

Latest Freights to Exchange
dates. En,gland, on England.
Bombay Aug..£4 to .e,5 104 if' tun ..2s #.? rupee
. .

Stripping abundant.
Calcutta... 9th Aug..£6 Os to £7 10sW ton..
Produce abundant, and shipping scarce.
China 4th July... 4s 9d W dollar.
No freight offering.
Singapore l3th'Aug..E3 15s 'to £5 lOs W ton..4s 6(1 dollar.
'Very-. light freight has paid £7 to £7 10s.;
only one vessel loading, for England.
Rio Janeiro.2oth 0ct...£2 15s to £3 10s if' tun..3s 24d to 3s 2id
41)) milrea.
7} tonticent.
premium.
Ships in good demand; stock of cotton 68,374 bales.
Mobile l6th N0v...%d per lb. 71 1% cent prom
Savannah• • 2sth N0y...11-16d to %d per lb. 811 cent preen
Cbarleston..23d ;id per lb. 9; to 91W cent.

N. Orleans...l6th Nov ..%d per lb

premium.
New York..24th N0v...%d to 7-16 d per lb. 81to911; cent.
premium.
[We intend to supply the latest information from a number of
other ports, but for the present we are unable to furnish any fur-
ther particulars, our arrangements being incomplete.—E.L.S.]

jtiailtro.

LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET. DEC. 15.

Since our last there has been a further improvement in the demand.
The sales of yesterday were 6,000 bags, and to-day the business
amounts to 3,500, the whole of which has been purchased by the
trade. All descriptions have had the benefit of the demand, but more
particularly East India, of which 2,500 have been sold in the last two
days at Id na Id 4P! lb advance on last week's prices. The market
generally has closed with much firmness.

LIVERPOOL CORN EXCHANGE, Dim. 13.
We have again to notice a continuance of very wet weather—very
injurious to the Wheat already sown, and completely impeding all
agricultural work out of doors. We have also again to remark the
rather large arrivals of Flour, chiefly new and of very dubious quality,
and of Oatmeal from Ireland, whilst of all kinds of Grain they are
very small, particularly of Wheat. At this day's market, although
transactions were altogether to a very small extent, at the prices of
this day week. For all other articles there was a very limited de-
mand, at a small decline, though hardly sufficient to warrant any
decided alte: 701 b. ad s d
alteration our last quotations.
WHEAT,
Englishred,crp .836 9 6 ta 10 0
Do. old 9 6 .. 10 0
208 11009 664
Irish
enrorheeled;mw,
white
e. 110080
.. 0 0
crop 1836 7 9 .. 9 0
Do. old 7 9 .. 9 0
Do. white 1836 8 3 9 3
Do. old 8 3 .. 9 3
Dantzig, red
Do, white
Stettin, red 0 0 .. 0 0
Do. white 0 0 .. 0 0
Conigsberg, red 0 0.. 0 0
Do. white
Riga&Petersburg 0 0.. 0 0
Odessa
Russian, hard 0 0.. 0 0
Canada, red 0 0.. 0 0
Do. -white
Bonded Wheat
RYE,imP. or. English
and Foreign, free 36 0.. 42 0
Do. in bond
BsaLEvArimp.qr
English, Malting... 44 0 .. 50 0
Do. Grinding,6olb 4 4 4 7
Irish, MaltinT. do. 5 6 .. 5 9
Do. Grinding, do. 5 0.. 5 3
Foreign, d. p. do. 0 0 0 0
i Do. n bond 0 0.. 0 0
OATS. 417 451 h.
E'rlish, crop 1836 /I 3.. 3 5
Do. old 3 8.. 4 0
Scoteh. &.c new.. 3 3 3 8
Do. old 3 10 4 2

OATS, 41' 45115.[1.836 e d a d
lrish,n. kilndried 3 6 e 3 81
Do. -old do.
Do. prime,42tb
Do. do. old 4 1.. 4 2
Foreign, free
Do. in bond . 2 9.. 8 6
PEASE, if' imp. qr.
,English, white
Foreign, white
BEANS, 4f' imp. qr.
English, new 49 0 .. 54 0
Do. Pigeon, old 52 0 56 0
Foreign, free
Do. in bond 39 0 .. 46 0
Irish, Tiek,e. new 44 0 ~ 47 0
Do. old 49 0.. 61 0
MALT, 41' imp. qr.
English

iNDIAN CORN,ina.gr.
Red
White ... ...
FLoun, 43t 2801 h.

English. fine 45 0 .. 56 0
Irish, 2ds new 46 0 55 0
Do. tine .
American. sweet, _ _ _

per hr). free.... 0 0.. 0 0
Do. in bond .... 26 0 .. 28 0
Do. sour, free.... 28 0.. 31 0
Do. in bond .... 29 0 .. 31 0
Canadian, free .. 27 0 .. 30 0
Do. in bond 0 0.. 0 0
OATMEAL, 472401 b
Ent:lisb, new .... 34 0 . 2Ci 0
, Irish, new
Do. old 33 0 o
BRAN, 4y 24th 1 8.. 1 10

PRIOES'OF SHARES. LIVERPOOL, DEc. 15, 1836.
Last Prices This day
RAILWAYS, &c. Per Share. Per Share,
Bolton and Leigh .. . ..£too paid£ 64 0 0 ....g
Bolton and Preston... .... ....... 3 .... 65 0 ....-
Birmingham and Gloucester.,.... 5 .... 5 0 0 ....
Ditto and Derby 5 .... par .... 717
BirliVlhead and Chester 2 .... 2100 „ , .
Cheltenham and Trim;' 5 .... 3 1 6.. . .
Chester and Crewe Junction .. .
Dublin and Drogheda
Dublin and Kilkenny 2 lOs
Eastern Counties ........
Edinburgh and Glasgow (old) .. • • 2 •• • •
Ditto ditto (new) •• • • 4•• • •
Ditto - Leith and Newhaven 1 ....
Gldsgow, Paisley, and Greenock 1 ....
Ditto ditto kilmarnoch & Ayr 2 lOs ....
Grand Sitilkion .. - .... .
Great Western 3O .... 43 5 0 .... 44 5
Grand Connection (Worcester).— 2 lOs 3 12 6 ....
Kenyon and Leigh lOU .... 120 0 0 ....
Liverpool and Manchester 100 .... 215 0 0 ....
Ditto quarter shares 25 .... 52 5 0 ....
Ditto half shares .... 45 0 0 ....
'London and Birmingham 7O .... 142 10 0 .... 140 10
Ditto and Soothampton 3O .... 21 0 0 ....
DM) & Brightln (Stephenson's) 5 .... 57 6 ....
Ditto and,Greenwich....
Leeds and Manchester 5 .... 12 0 0 ...,
Leicester and ,Swannineon . .
Mancliester:Bolton, & Bury.
Manchester 34 Cheshire Junction _ 5 .... 517 6 ..•
Manchester South Union. , 2 .... 315 0 ..7.
Midland Counties 5 . • 3 2 6 ...
Preston and Wyre 2 . ....
North Midland - 10 15 17 6 .... 15 15
South Midland nar ....
North Union .70 .... 59 111 0 ... _
Newcastle and Carlisle 100 .... 101 0 0 ....
Ditto quarter shares '2O .... 11 0 0 ...,
South Eastern 2 .... 216 6 ....
St. Helen's and Runcorn Gap 100 .... 35. U a. , ,
Warrington and Newton.•.•. loo .. 179 0 0.,..
Wigan Branch 100
%
Ulster
Hull and Selby.. •

3 0 0 ....
1 10 0 ....
2 1 6 .... 2 2
4 15 0 ...
5 12 6 ...
0 15 0 ...
1 6 6 ...

215 O.
4 5 0.

BANKS.

Bank of 10 paid 25 2 6
Commercial of Liverpool SO .... 20 0 0
Liverpool Union lO ... 14 10 0 ....
Royal of Liverpool 250 .... 250 0 0 ....
Northern and Central llt .... 10 7 6 ...
Tradesman's 5 .... 4 9 0 ....
United Trades' ditto lO .... 10 7 6 ..•
•
North and South Wales.. 5 .... 4 8 6 ..
. " of Manchester lO .... 13 15 0 ....
M'chester & L'pool Dsct 15 .... 21 5 0
South Lar cashire 5 .... 4 0 ....
Borough Bank 5 ..., 10 7 6 .... 10 12
Commercial Bank of England 5 .. • . 6 12 6 ....
ilts awl Dorset lO ...,
East of England 7 lOs
GAS, WATER. WORKS, &c.
Exchange Buildings .1.100 paid 171 0 0 ....
L'pool & Harrington Water Work s2OO 472 1) 0 ....
Bootle Ditto Stock . .. 326 o
Liverpool Coal Gas Company Stock .... 3F15 0 0
L'pool. New Gas & Coke C0.....£100 195 0 ,
Ditto New Shares 7O .... 153 0 0 ...„
ASSURANCE COMPANIES.
Liverpool Marine Assurance C0..E25 paid 17 7 6
Oc.an Asstiran'ee Company. .. . ... iii .. • . S 2 6
Liverpool Fire and Life Assurance 2 lOs .2 17 6
Manchester Assurance Company 10 ...•
DOCKS, FERRIES, 1,11.:W COMPANIES, Re
Harrington Dock £3O paid 20 0 0
Anderton Carrying Coinnr.ny... .10 .... 10 2 6
Wouuside Ferry l7 lOs 26 10 0
Rock Ferry
nonk's Ferry 5••• •4 17 6 ... • •
Egreniont r,rry -
Steam Tug•Compat.:,
Apothecaries' Conp ny •• • • 2 5 0 „
Liverpool Fish Cornt,any ...• 019 C •
Liverpool Timber..
MINES,
Wheal Prosper Tin and Clay C 0... Al los 1 in 6
Kellewerris Consolidated Mines
West Tresavean Tin & Copper do 1 1 15
British Silver. Lead, & Copper do, 2 . 1 10 . o
Liverpool and Manchester Coal 2 110 0

8 10 0 ....

The Amelia, Lyall, sailed yesterday for St Thomas, has put back.
Wellsford, Andrews, from London, at St Andrews.
Colonist, M'Master, from St. Andrew's for Dublin, off Cove, in 21
days.
Cervantes, Rogerson, from Campeachv, off Ilfracombe.
Mauney, for Leghorn, passed Point Lynas, at 10 a.m.
—,
Jessie Logan, M'Master, hence, for Demerara, has put back from
Pile Foudry.
an.. n..., Oho Bride, Porter, for
Bourdeaux and the Mauritius, have put back, having been in contact
last night off Holyhead. The former lost jib-boom and fore topgal.
lant-mast, and the latter bowsprit, head, and fore topgallant-mast.
HAMBURGH, 30th Nov.—Duringa gale yesterday, the following ves-
sels, hound to Liverpool, were injured :—The Triton was damaged,
and will he detained a week; the Caledonia lost bowsprit, and had
her bow stove ; the Procter was upset, and is full of water, and the
John and James is aground, and must discharge to repair.
SAVANNAH, Nov. 3.—The British King, from Liverpool, in coming
in on the 27th ult. struck the bar, and entered the river leaky, and
will require to be hove down.

WEDNESDAY, DEC. I4.—Noon, Wind N.W.—Moderate.
(An Irish mail.—High Water 3h 45m p.m.)

ARRIVED—The Claremont, Stephens, from Jamaica—Lockwoods,
Mackie ; and Thomas, Reid, from Quebec—Nantasket, Crocker, from
Savannah—Fisherman, Gibaut, from Naples—Ranger, Jellard, from
Trieste—Bride of Abydos, Carpenter, from Zante Sz Vostizza—Joven
Elina, Larringa, from Tarragona—Constitution,Wilson, from Charles-
ton—Governor Troup, Alexander, from Savannah.

ALSO ARRIVED—The Ocean, Peile, from Cork—The Thetis. Town-
ley ; and Leeds, Soy, from Dublin—Henry, Hale, from Donaghadee
—Robert Napier, Coppin, from Londonderry—Greyhound. Owens,
from Bristol—Maria, James, from Newport—Eagle, Crawford, from
Padstow —Thomas, Hatton; and William, Brockbank, from Ulver-
stone—Nascow, --, from Padstow.

The Jumna, Robinson ; and John O'Gaunt, Robertson, hence, at
Batavia, 30th August, and sailed for China previous to the 2d Sept.
The Samuel Winter, Rodger, hence off Anjer, 25th August.
Alexander, Pringer, hence off ditto, 28th.
Eleanor, -, from London, at China, 28th June.
Tarquin, Hunt, hence, ctt ditto, 27th August.
Enterprize, Roberts, hence, at Batavia.
Mearns, Mitchell, hence, at Bay Chaleur.
Magnet, Payne, hence. at Charleston.
Brighton, 51•Kissock, hence, at Darien.
Rothschild, Laidley, hence, at Savannah.
The David, Adair •' Ann Petley, Sinclair; Mary, Master; Palmer,
Francis ; and Eagle, Barnes, hence, at Messina.
The Vesta, Orfeur, from Malta, at ditto.
Carl Johan, Wilcken, hence, at Hambro'.
Shepherdess, Turner, hence for Palermo, at Waterford.
The Le Schema, Constean, hence for Bourdeaux, at King Road, in
distress.
The Thomas and Nancy ; and Pelican, hence for Drogheda, at the
Isle of Man.
The Fortuna, Jansen, hence for Antwerp, at Bideford, with loss of
bulwarks and stanchions.
The Byker, Bruce, hence for Trieste, at Falmouth, with loss of
bulwarks, &c.
The Minerva, hence for Demerara, was spoken in lat. 40, long. 15.
The Floraville, hence for the Cape of Good Hope, was spoken 22d
of October, in Ist. 5 5, long. 27 W.
The Captain Ross, hence for Halifax, was spoken 21st ult. in lat.
44, long. O.
The Aliquls, hence for Bombay, was spoken 25th ult. in lat. 18 8,
long. 29 W.
The Duchess of Orleans, hence for New York, was spoken 26th ult.
in lat. 45, long. 43.
The Exquisite, Sayer, from Smyrna for this port, at Carthagena,
leaky.
The labez, Tindall, from Odessa, at Constantinople 13th ult. and
sailed same day for this port.
The Gipsy, Shotten, from Dublin, at Bourdeaux.
lanthe, Brown, from Newfoundland, at Lisbon.
Envoy, Dunn, from Buenos Ayres, at Antwerp.
Johanna. Gesina, Bane, hence, at Bremen.

Rosalind, Little, from Bombay, at Cuxhaven.
Venus, --, from Buenos Ayres, at ditto.
The P R C. -- from Arichat, at Jersey.
Brothers, Mosey, from Quebec, at Dublin, with loss of bulwarks.
The Castor. Thompson, from Cuba for Swansea, at Kinsale, leaky,
and with loss of foremast, bowsprit, Sm.
The Eugene, Zemin, from Ostend for this pore, at Deal.
The Egyptian, Sayers, from New York, at Falmouth. •
The Tapley, Tapley, sailed from Gravesend for Calcutta, 9th inst.
The Lady Douglas, from Maryport for Sierra Leone, at Waterford.
The Lowther Castle is on shore near Crosby, and not the Lord
Nelson.
The Adelaide, Bainbridge, for Mobile ; the Thomas Worthington,
Raekam, for Lima ; and Themis, Ferguson, for Lisbon, has put back.
The Cassiopea, , from St Petersburg for this port, ut. Stromness.
The Scotia, Rink, from St John, N B, for this port, was spoken 3d
instant, in lit. 45 9, long. 29 35. •
The Claremont, Stephens, from Jamaica, at thts port, sailed from
Montego Bay, Ist Nov. The Duke of Clarence was to sail about the
20th. for this port.
The Bride of Abydos, Carpenter, from Vostizza, at this port. On
the 7th ult. otr Malta, spoke the Tagus, from Cephalonia ; Harlequin,
from Taganrog ; and Donor, from Gergenti. -Passed the Straits of
Gibraltar in company with a great number of vessels.

Ilamnao', Nor. 30.—The Flora, Wolff, bound to Lisbon, sustained
considerable damage whilst loading at A ltona, by a vessel falling over
on her, and must discharge to repair. Dec: 2. A frost set in at Riga,
on the 23d ult. which covered the river with ice as far as the Light-
house. The ships frozen in were to be cut out in a day or two. Dec.
6, The Weiehel was, entirely frozen over on the 25th ult. and S or 10
vessels lying at Danzig and Neufahrwasa must be cut out.
FAYAL, Nov. 24.—The Kiero, Sheppard, from Bombay to Liver-
pool, was totally wrecked on the south point of Pico, 22d instant—
crew saved.

WEstroaT, Dec. B.—The Theodore, Backer: Glasgow, Stewart ;
Majestic, Monk ; Watson, l‘l'Lncas ; and Elizabeth, Cotter, are all
ready to sail for Liverpool.
MARYPORT Dec. B.—The Dykes, from Quebec to Lancaster, in
putting into this harbour struck the pier and filled,
Exmovrn, Dec. I.4'.—The Eliza, of Liverpool, was abandoned 2Gth
ult. in lat. 45, long. 4.1, being waterlogged and lost foremast—crew
saved by the Duchess of Orleans, bound to New Orleans.

THURSDAY, Dge. 13.-Noon, Wiud S.W.—Moderate.
, • (AL. Maii.—High Water
Anntyrsn—Martha. Greaton, from Charleston—Ann Creighton,
Bowaek, from St. Andrews—Hazard; from Naples.

ilenr'. Allen, hence, at Leghorn, 27th Nov.
Ellen German, Blundell, hence, ut Leghorn, 30th Nov. having
made her passage in twenty-one days.
Renown, IVl`Kenny, sailed from Milford, for Africa, 11th inst.
Bob Logic, Errington, from Jaraaica. at Cove.
John Francis, Bonnyman, from Quebec, ut.ditto.
Cove, Read, hence, for Newfoundland, at Waterford.
Chieftain, M'Bride, from Quebec, for this port, at the Clyde, with
loss of topmast, and sails split.
Vnnessee, -, from Savannah, at the Clyde.
Jupiter, Henck, from Wolgast, at Stromness.
Alex. Savin, Wirt, from St. Petersburgh, for this port, at ditto.
Lady Dou;las, Melmore, for Sierra Leone, and Enchanetreesns,cioDneod-
naldson, for Nk.w York, sailed from Waterford 10th inset.
Mar, Hartley, Peestmati, sailed from Cove, for Calcutta, 11th inst.
The Active, 'Robson. from Dalhousie to Dundee, was b
4th inst. in Ist. 4930, long. 32, being waterlogged. Crew saved by
the Ann Creighton.

BIRTH.
On Sunday last, the lady of Thomas Williams, Esq. of Kcnsington-
place, of a daughter.

MARRIED.

On Friday, the 19th ult. at Shrewsbury, Mr. Evan Jones, late of'
Llanrwst, Denbighshire, to Miss Jane Roberts, of Cotwen.
On Saturday, the 29th ult. at Lytham, Mr. Wm. Stirzaker, per-
fumer, Blackpool, to Catherine, eldest daughter of Mr. H. Newsham,
boot and shoemaker, of the former place.
On Monday, the 28th ult. at Blackburn, John, second son of Mr.
John Thompson, cotton-manufacturer. to Ellen, only daughter of Mr.
William Hargreaves, fruiterer.
Same day, at St. David's Church, by the Rev, Robert Davies, Mr.
John Collier to Margaret Moore. only daughter of Mrs. Griffiths,
Cheshire Cheese Tavern, Temple-street.
On Tuesday, the 29th ult. at Blackburn, Mr. Lawrence Wareing.
Chorley, to Betsey, youngest daughter of Mr. Rose; Renshaw-hall,
Buxton, near Chorley.
Same day, Mr. Thomas Chaffers, Burnley, to Sarah,. daughter of
Daniel Arkwright, Esq. of Preston.
owTharaday, the Ist inst. at Denbigh, Mr. Robert Roberts to Miss
.7‘iatilda Bland, both of Denbigh.
On Saturday last, at St. George's Church, Hanover-square, London,
by the Lord Bishop of London, Captain the Hon. Charles James Fox
Stanley, Grenadier Guards, third son of the Earl of Derby, to Frances
Augusta, daughter of Lieut.-General Sir Henry Campbell.
On Sunday last at-SL ICiary's Church,,Edge-hill, 4Wr. T. Moyle to
Susanna Margarttr;eidest daughter of Mr.-William Comte, all of' Tox-
teth-park.
On Tuesday last, at St. Peter's Church, Mr. Henry Smith, of Man-
chester, to Miss Susannah Bell, niece of Mrs. Silverwood, of this.
town.
On Wednesday last, at St. Thomas's Church, Mr. Andrew Nicol,.
mate of the Berbice, to Miss Rose Hillock.
Yesterday, at St. Philip's Church, by the Rev. Thomas Stanley
Bowstead, M.A. Mr: James Wilson, youngest sod 'of the late Mr.
John Wilson, ship-builder, of this town, to Miss Mary Louisa, only
daughter of Captain Langley.
Same day, at St. Luke's Church, by the Rev. James Aspinall. M.A.
Mr. William Muir to Martha, second daughter of John Andrews, Esq.
Stanley-terrace, Isle of Man.