The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-02-26 00:00:00

MEETING OF THE DOCK COMMITTEE

The usual weekly meeting of the Dock Committee was
held yesterday. The following members were present :
Messrs. Benn, Barclay, T. Holt, Holmes, Quayle, Booth,
Mellor, Bulky, G. Holt, Tobin, Martin, Ripley, Smith,
Middleton, and Aikin. Mr. Benn presided.
On the recommendation of the Sub-committee of Works,
a shed was ordered to be erected on the south side of Cla-
rence Graving Dock, for the accommodation of the fire en-
gine, at an estimated cost of £25 or £3O.
The tender of Messrs. Logan and Co. for the supply of
300 fathoms of chain was accepted.

On the recommendation-Ortl; Sub-committee for the
Marine Surveyor's Department, the tender of Mr. John
Brown, to erect the intended sea-mark at Grange for 12250,
was accepted. The Sub-committee further recommended
that the telegraph station on Hilbre Island be re-built, un-
der the superintendence of the surveyor.—Ordered.
•

Several repairs were ordered to be made to the upper and
lower lighthouses at Hoylake, under the direction of Mr.
Williams, of lloylake ; the land belonging to the trust to be
at the same time enclosed with wooden palisadoes. The roof
of Bidston lighthouse was also ordered to be re-slated.
The captain of the Point of Ayr life-boat was ordered to
be paid £3, and the crew £2 each, for saving the crew of the
Ann, of Whitehaven, wrecked in December last.
The Sub-committee, to whom the matter was referred last
week, reported that the master of Prince's Dock had failed
in his duty in not allowing three of the gatemen to go before
the stipendiary magistrate, as requested; and recommended
that he be admonished to be more attentive in future. After
a few words from Mr. TOBIN, the master was Called in, and
the CHAIRMAN, addressing him, said the committee were of
opinion he had not acted correctly with regard to the answer
he had sent, when desired by the magistrate to send three
gatemen to give evidence ►n a case before the court. The
committee thought that, as a matter of course, he ought not
only to have been more civil, but to have sent the men. It
was necessary for the committee to support the police, and
for their servants to do so likewise. if the policeman saw
the crew of the Mary Hartley were not doing their duty, his
instructions were to report it to his inspector, who thereupon
took the necessary steps. He (the chairman) trusted that
on all future occasions he (the dock-master) would be ready
to support the police, and to give them all the assistance in
his power, instead of standing aloof, as he had, and meeting
them with a hostile feeling.—The master then bowed and
retired.
The Sub-committee reported, that on examination there
was no foundation whatever for the charges made against the
master of George's Dock by Messrs. M'Arthur and Co.
The receiver of dock dues at Runcorn reported that the
receipts for the past month amounted to £6B 13s. 6d.
The CHAIRMAN stated, that Mr. Chapman being out of
town, the motion of which he had given notice would be post-
poned till Thursday next.
Mr. ATKIN gave notice, that when Mr. Chapman moved
that resolution, he should add, by way of rider, something
to this effect—" And that a moderate rate of charge be made
upon all vessels using the docks, coming coastwise."
The committee then separated.

The Queen of England possesses the special privilege that
she can, by her writ of protection, privilege a defendant from
all personal and many real suits for one year at a time, and
no longer, and in respect of his being engaged in her service
out of the realm. The last that appears on the books is one
granted by William the Third, in 1692, to Lord Cutts, to
protect him from being outlawed by his tailor.
In consequence of the Princess Augusta having died in-
testate, the whole of her effects, which have been ad-
ministered to in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury by
their Royal Highnesses the Dukes of Sussex and Cam-
bridge, and sworn to be under £30,000., will be divided
amongst the heirs at law, viz., the King of Hanover, the
Dukes of Sussex and Cambridge, the Duchess of Gloucester,
and the Princess Sophia, her late Royal Highness's brothers
and sisters. The property consists principally of the furni-
ture, books, plate, and paintings at Fregmore, and the
Princess's jewels: which are of considerable value.

CORRESPONDENCE,

MAYNOOTH COLLEGE

4 LETTER FROM TILE REV. HUGH MWEILE
TO I. C. COLQUHOUN, ESQ., M.P. %

MY DEAR MR. COLQUHOUN,

I feel assured that you will not deem any apology neces-
sary for' this public address upon a subject with which your
name now stands hopefully associated in the minds of all
who set a true scriptural value upon the blessings of civil
and religious liberty, and the preservation of our Protestant
institutions, under the shielding protection of which those
blessings are maintained. •

In the debate which arose in the House of Commons on
Mr. Plumptre's motion against a continuance of the grant
to Maynooth College, on the 234 of June last year, the cause
of truth appears to have sustained some temporary damage
by a doctrine laid down by the noble viscount her Majesty's
Chief Secretary for Ireland, followed as it was by an impo-
sing, and at the time unanswered, statement from the right
hon. and learned member for Tipperary.
Lord Morpeth said (I quote from the Morning Chronicle
of June 24, 1840)
" There might be a general objection to the grant of pub-
lic money for the instruction and education of the Roman
Catholic clergy,"—

an important admission, opening a discussion of the general
merits of the question ; but his lordship continued—

" but taking the propriety of such a grant as admitted, then,
with respect to the system carried on in the college, and the
mode in which the grant was administered, he contended
that they were more subjects for the consideration of the
Roman Catholic clergy, and the Roman Catholic authorities,
than of the honourable member for Kent. (Cheers.) So
also with respect to the objection which was made to the
books which were read, or the studies which were pursued
there. (Cheers.) For himself he confessed that he was not
compelled to enter into any argument as to the character of
the books, or the extent of the studies pursued there, for he
had felt that into these matters it was no part of his duty to
inquire. (Opposition cheers.) "

This extraordinary declaration from a minister of the crown
was, it is true, rebuked afterwards with a becoming mixture
of dignity and severity by Sir Robert Peel, but still it had its
temporary effect upon the house, in limiting attention to the
mere matter of the grant of money ; and formed, therefore,
a most judicious prelude to the statemeneof Mr. Shell, that
the grant in question was a matter of contract entered into
before the union, and ratified by an act of parliament. The
right hon. gentleman said,
"The case of Maynooth rests on a clear contract entered
into before the union, and ratified by act of parliament. I
have been a good deal surprised that this act has never been
quoted, at least has never been relied on as strongly as it
ought to have been in this house. * * * Mr. Pitt felt
that the ministers of Catholic Ireland ought not to be the
conductors of French principles, or instruments of French
machination, and, acccordingly, the College of Maynooth
was founded and endowed under the 35th of George 111.
That act recites the expediency of endowing a Catholic semi-
nary, and a grant of £B,OOO (after various provisions for the
establishment and regulation of Maynooth) is made by that
act of parliament. (Loud cheers.) The college having been
thus endowed, another acttwas passed in 1800, confirming the
former act, and making further regulations. Thus Maynooth,
before the union, became one of the national institutions of
Ireland."
This seemed to cut short all further discussion. And cer•
tainly if the statement of the right hon. gentleman be correct,
that the annual grant to Maynooth is a matter of contract,
guaranteed by the act of union, (as his speech intimated most
successfully without actually saying so,) and if the doctrine
of the noble secretary be politically orthodox, that the state
has no further duty to perform in the matter, but simply to
make the grant, and leave the recipients of the public money
to use it as they please ; if these things be so, it must be con-
fessed that the ground for discussion is much narrowed, if
not wholly cut off. So several members previously prepared
to support Mr. Plumptre's motion seemed to think, for they
left the house before the division.

But are these things so? This question must be brought
to the test, in the debate which we all hope will arise upon
your motion next week; and my reasons for thus addressing
you in the mean time are these. A general though vague
impression exists in the country (arising out of the debate
referred to) that the annual grant to Maynooth forms a part
of a guarantee solemnly made to Ireland in the Act of Union.
Upon many sincere supporters of that union, who deprecate
all agitation of its repeal, in whole or in part, this impression
is operating as a hindrance in the way of signing petitions to
parliament against the continuance of the grant. And lam
anxious to avail myself of your name for the wide and prompt
dissemination of the fact that no such guarantee exists.

1. In the Act of Union there is NO MENTION made of
Maynooth—NONE WHATEVER, OF ANY SORT !

This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of dry re-
ference to the statute. I have just now read the act with this
object in view ; and I pledge myself to thousands of our
poorer Protestant brethren who cannot command time for
such references themselves, but who I am thankful to say
will not hesitate to repose confidence in this assertion of
mine—that the Act of Union makes no mention whatever of
Maynooth College.

The impression, therefore, so far as this point is concerned,
so skilfully produced by Mr. Sheil's speech, is a false im-
pression; and the apprehension arising therefrom in the
matter of petitioning, is a needless apprehension. Neither is
this all.

2. In the acts of the Irish parliament, previous to the
union, by which Mr. Sheil said the College of Maynooth
was founded and endowed, there is no mention whatever of
any annual grant to Maynooth !
Mr. Sheil specified two acts—one passed in 1795 (the 35th
of George III.) and the other in 1800. The act of 1795 is
entitled, (I quote from a valuable compilation just published
by James Lord, Esq.) " An act for the better education of
persons professing the Popish or Roman Catholic religion."

Preamble.—" Whereas, by the laws now in force in this
kingdom, it is not lawful to endow any college or seminary
for the education exclusively ofpersons professing the Roman
Catholic religion, and it is now become expedient that a
seminary should be established for that purpose; be it there-
fore enacted, by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and tem-
poral, and commons in this present parliament assembled,
and by the authority of the same, that the Right Hon. John
Viscount Fitzgibbon, Lord Chancellor of Ireland ;
(Here follow twenty different names and then the statute
proceeds)

and the persons to be hereafter elected as bj this act is di-
rected, shall be trustees for the purpose of establishing, en-
dowing, and maintaining one acadamy for the education only
of persons professing the Roman Catholic religion ; and that
the said trustees shall have full power and authority to re-
ceive subscriptions and donations to enable them to establish
and endow an academy for the education of persons profess-
ing the Roman Catholic religion, and to purchase and acquire
lands, not exceeding the annual value of one thousand
pounds, and to erect and maintain all such buildings as may
be by the said trustees deemed necessary for the lodging and
accommodation of the president, masters, professors, fellows
and students, which shall from time to time be admitted into
or reside in such academy."

Here it is made lawful, which it was not before, to endow
such a college, and the trustees named are invested with full
power to raise subscriptions for the purpose ; but there is
not a word here about a national annual grant. The 2d, 3d,
4th, sth, 6th, 7th, Bth, and 9th sections refer entirely to the
details of internal management, and the 10th and 11th sec-
tions are as follow :

" 10. And whereas, by an act of parliament passed this
session of parliament, intituled, An act for securing the
payment of the annuities and the interest upon the principal
sums therein provided for, towards the discharge of such
principal sums, in such manner as therein is directed, and
for enabling the officers of his Majesty's treasury to receive
certain sums for a limited time, in manner therein mentioned,
and for granting to his Majesty a certain sum of money out
of the consolidated fund, and for applying a certain sum of
money, therein mentioned, for the service of the year one
thousand seven hundred and ninety-five,' a sum, not exceed-
ing two millions four hundred and forty-nine thousand six
hundred pounds, sixteen shillings, and ninepence farthing is
granted to his Majesty for the service of the present yenr ;
be it enacted, that any sum or sums of money, not exceeding
eight thousand pounds, part of the said sum of two millions
four hundred and forty-nine thousand six hundred pounds,
sixteen shillings and ninepence farthing, shall and may be
issued and paid by the commissioners of his Majesty's trea-
sury, or any three or more of them, towards establishing the
said academy."

" 11. And be it enacted, that all sum and sums of money
from time to time issued and paid out of his Majesty's trea-
sury, on account of the said sum of eight thousand pounds,
shall be paid to the trustees by this act constituted, or to any
seven or more of them, and shall be accounted for before the
commissioners of imprest accounts."
Here out of the revenue granted for the service of that
particular year, 1795, a sum not exceeding £BOOO. is voted
towards the establishing of the College ; but neither here is
there the most remote allusion to an annual grant : much
less to any " clear contract," such as is alleged.
The second Act specified by Mr. Sheil, passed in 1800, re-
cites the preambles of the Act just quoted, appoints visitors,
changes the trustees, and makes other regulations in detail,
but does not contain one syllable on the subject of an annual

grant !
As a matter of fact, the sum originally voted in the year
1795 towards the establishing of the College, was voted again,
year after year ; but if there be an Act of Parliament in exist-
ence pledging the nation to continue that vote, any more
than any other item in the estimates ; it remains to be spe-
cified. The references given by the right hon. gentleman do
not sustain his assertions. He may possibly be able to
amend his references; but till he does so, we must be ei-
cused for denying the existence of any contract in this
matter.

The Bth article of the Act of Union contains a clause,
which perhaps may be claimed, as ratifying indirectly all that
had previously been done for Maynooth ; but it is only by
dislocating it from its context that it can be made to wear
even the semblance of support for such a claim. The article
is this—

" That all laws in force at the time of the union, and all
the courts of civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the
respective kingdoms, shall remain as now by law established
within the same ; subject only to such alterations and regu-
lations from time to time as circumstances may appear to the
Parliament of the United Kingdom to require."

If there had been " a law in force at the time of the union"
endowing Maynooth with an annual grant : or if Maynooth
with a grant annually voted and inclusive of that grant, had
been one of " the courts of civil or ecclesiastical jurisdiction
in the kingdom " then the former clause of this article might
be pleaded as, by a general reference, involving a contract :
but even then, the latter clause expressly subjects the enact-
ment to the subsequent will of the imperial parliament.
This is made more remarkable still by contrast with the
sth article of the union, which contains really a " clear con

tract " without any proviso for subsequent alterations. It

is this—

" That the Churches of England and Ireland, as now by
law established, be united into one Protestant Episcopal
Church, to he called The United Church of England and
Ireland,' and that the doctrine, worship, discipline, and go-
vernment of the said united church shall be, and shall remain
in fullforce for ever, as the same are now by law established
for the Church of England : and that the continuance and
preservation of the said united church, as the Established
Church of England and Ireland, shall be deemed and taken
to be an essential and fundamental part of the union : and
that, in like manner, the doctrine, worship, discipline, and
government of the Church of Scotland, shall remain and be
preserved, as the same are now established by law, and by
the acts of the union of the two kingdoms of England and
Scotland."

How far the government of the united church has continued
in full force in those dioceses which have been deprived of
their bishops and handed over to the episcopal superintend-
ence of prelates who had already too much to attend to, is a
question well deserving the consideration of gentlemen who
manifest so much sensitiveness on the subject of good faith in
contracts.

The whole subject is fairly open to inquiry and discussion ;
and it is to be hoped that the advice given last year by the
Right Hon. Bart. the member for Tamworth will be cor-
dially taken and acted on. He said, "he thought it was the
interest of those engaged in the education of Maynooth, to
challenge inquiry. He would advise them by all means, for
their own character, to conciliate the good will of Protestants.
So far from being subjected to any injurious imputation for
submitting to inquiry, he thought that those concerned in
Maynooth ought to be the very first to challenge it."
It may surely be added in all fairness, that after the heavy
accusations, supported by documentary evidence derived
from her own class books, which have been advanced against
Maynooth, if those concerned in the system pursued there

continue to resist inquiry, their resistance ought to confirm
parliament in the determination to have the inquiry instituted

—an inquiry, too, so conducted that it shall not be evasive or
superficial, remembering always that as competent tknow-
ledge of any system is required in those who examine, as in
those who reply.

I am, my dear sir,
Very faithfully yours,
HUGH M`NEILE

Liverpool, 25th February, 1841

CHURCH PASTORAL AID SOCIETY,

[The following letter has been handed to us, with a request
to insert it in the columns of the STANDARD. As the
annual meeting of the Liverpool Auxiliary takes place in
the course of next month, we are anxious that the claims
of this valuable society should be fairly laid before the
public, and feel no hesitation in complying with the re-
quest of our respected correspc

lndent.l

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

SlR,—The following letter, excepting the parts within the
parentheses and the postscript, was forwarded to be inserted
in• the Leeds Intelligeneer. Though a letter of the same
date with mine, sent by Dr. Molesworth against the Church
Pastoral Aid Society, has been twice inserted in that paper,
no room has been found for my communication. I trust that
your sense of justice to a most valuable but calumniated so-
ciety will induce you to admit into your paper tae following
remarks.—l am, sir, yours respectfully,

ED. EDWARDS

TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'LEEDS INTELLIGENCER.

SlR,—With the Rev. W. Sinclair I fully sympathise in
" the deepest reluctance to quit the retired and unobtrusive
round of pastoral duties," &c., as expressed by him in your
paper of Saturday last. And it he—a resident clergyman in
the parish of Leeds—deemed it proper to apologise for offer-
ing, through the medium of the Leeds Intelligeneer, his just
remarks on the proceedings of the meeting at the Music-
hall, in your town, on Monday the Ist instant, much more
ought I to feel that an apology is due from me, for venturing
to intrude on the notice of the readers of the Intelliyeneer,
any observations in addition to those of Mr. Sinclair—seeing
that I am unconnected with the parish of Leeds, or the dio-
cese in which that parish is situated. But since others than
those ecclesiastically connected with Leeds or the diocese of
Ripon officiated at that meeting, I may, I trust, be excused
for presuming to offer the following remarks.
It is to a part of the proceedings at the meeting in ques-
tion, that I advert—the attack made, and, as it appears to
me, gratuitously and unjustly made, on the CHURCH Pasto-
ral Aid Society ; and that under cover of meeting to advo-
cate and aid " the Society for the employment of additional
Curates in populous Places."
It occurs to me that the objections, as far as I am ac-
quainted with the objections to the Pastoral Aid Society, as
urged by its opponents, may be brought within a narrow
limit, and met on the ground so vauntingly occupied by the
objectors themselves.

1. It is objected to the Pastoral Aid Society that it em-
ploys, or rather pays, lay persons, who are engaged as reli-
gious instructors, though by the appointment and under the
direction of the clergy of the parishes in which the lay agents
are employed.
The truly venerable and extensively useful " Society for
the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts" employs
and pays lay persons as catechists, who are religious instruc-
tors in our colonial parishes and dioceses. The National
Society also sanctions, and in some instances pays, national
schoolmasters and schoolmistresses who are but lay persons,
and are religious instructors in our parishes. The lay cate-
chists in our colonies, and the national schoolmasters and
schoolmistresses in our parishes, are not more by the ap-
pointment and under the control and direction of the clergy
in the respective parishes, than the lay agents paid by the
Pastoral Aid Society ; and if the objection to the lay agency
of the latter society be valid, why is it not etr,slly valid in
the case of the two other societies ? (Is it replied that the
laymen paid by the Pastoral Aid Society are under no epis-
copal jurisdiction, I reply that they are as much under epis-
copal jurisdiction as the national schoolmasters and school-
mistresses in any parish (Leeds or Rochdale to wit), unless
the latter are licensed by the bishops of the dioceses respec-
tively. And are they so licensed, according to the 64th
canon? What episcopal authority or sanction had the Vicar
of Rochdale or Canon Parkinson to attend a public religious
meeting in the diocese of Ripon? Is it replied that the Vicar
of Leeds had invited them ? The Vicar of Leeds, without
the sanction of his Bishop, cannot strictly authorise any
clergyman out of the diocese to officiate in ANY CHURCH
at Leeds, much less authorise and sanction strange clergy-
men, or any clergymen, to officiate at a religious meeting,
such as that held in the Music-hall—an unconsecrated, un-
licensed building.)
2. It is objected.to the Church Pastoral Aid Society, that
it presumes to decide whether the recommendation of such
a clergyman as is to be paid by the society, be satisfactory or
not to the society ; and this decision is committed not to
laymen, hut to clergymen.
Now, if the objection to a body or committee of clergy-
men such as the Pastoral Aid Society employs as its com-
mittee, to judge of the propriety of the appointment of a
candidate for a curacy, be valid ; it must be at least equally
valid against a lay patron, or lay trustees (as at Leeds) of a
church living, who judge and determine on the fitness of a
clerical candidate for that living : and yet such an exercise of
judgment in the latter case is never denounced or objected
to, as being unecclesiastical, or as invading the " episcopal
authority." And they who, for the sake of obtaining a
curacy, would disdain to submit their recommendation to
the examination and decision of a body of jlergymen, such
as the Church Pastoral Aid Committee, would not probably
hesitate, for the sake of obtaining a church living, to submit
their recommendation or qualification to be judged and de-
cided by a single layman, or several laymen, as trustees and
patrons—e. q., the lay trustees as patrons of Leeds vicarage,
or the lay trustees of the Haberdashers' Company's chap-
laincy. To possess a legal right or authority to present any
clergyman to a living by a lay patron or patrons, is a distinct
thing from examining and deciding on the fitness of such a
clergyman for that living : and it is against this latter prero-
gative as exercised by the Pastoral Aid. Clerical Committee,
that the objection of the opponents of this society is directed ;
though,
'without any objection the same prerogative is exer-
cised by lay patrons of church livings.
To assert that in the late rejection of Mr. Briarley Brown,
the " CHURCH Pastoral Aid Society" interfered with episco-
pal authority or judgment, exhibits some degree of ignorance
or bad faith. For, in this case, the Lord Bishop of. Chester
in countersigning the testimonium, previously signed on
behalf of Mr. Briarley Brown by the clergymen in the Ches-
ter diocese, did not recommend Mr. Brown, or express any
opinion as to his qualification, but simply testified that the
clergy who had signed the testimonium, were such clergymen
in his lordship's diocese as they had subscribed themselves to
be. This, and no more, is the object of every episcopal
countersignature to the testimonium on behalf of a candidate
either for holy orders, or for a curacy. What then becomes
of the objection, that in this or any similar case, the society
supersedes the " authority" or " judgment of the bishops ?"
(Would Dr. Hook or Dr. Molesworth give a title to a can-
didate for holy orders, or a curacy to an ordained clergyman,
on the simple testimonium signed by three clergymen and
countersigned by the bishop, without a prior enquiry and de-
cision as to the fitness of the candidate ? And have these
antecedent enquiries and decision any more episcopal authority
than the antecedent enquiry and decision made by the Pastoral
Aid Society ? The veto exercised by the society supersedes
no " episcopal authority ;" interferes with no " episcopal
judgment ;" it is a salutary veto to guard the funds of a
charitable institution from being appropriated to pay and
support such persons as would cause damage to the church
by withdrawing from its ministry.)

3. It is objected to the CHURCH Pastoral Aid Society that
it is not ecclesiastically constituted ; and, therefore, is not a
church society. What in the view of the objectors may le-
gitimately constitute a "church society," being, as far as I
am aware, undefined by the objectors themselves, renders an
answer to their objection somewhat more difficult.
They will scarcely maintain, I suppose, that the united
concurrence or patronage of the Archbishops, Bishops, and
Clergy of the Church of Christ in this realm, will be sufficient
to constitute legitimately a CHURCH Society ; since, as it
appears to me, the whole clerical body of the three orders
have no authority (apart from royal authority) to make or
direct to be made, public collections of money in the respec-
tive parishes, in aid of any societies, even when those societies
are incorporated by royal authority ; or, according to the
twelfth canon, to " make rules, orders, or constitutions in
causes ecclesiastical without the king's authority." Are all
the " five societies," so strenuously advocated by the oppo-
nents of the Cu viten Pastoral Aid Society, constituted by
the required authority, any more than the CHURCH Pastoral
Aid Society, or the 'CHURCH Missionary Society? If not,
what becomes of the ground of objection to " the Pastoral
Aid Society, that it is not a Church Society."
And here I may, I hope, be permitted to expresomy igno-
rance of the " ecclesiastical authority" (or " episcopal autho-
rity") by which such a meeting for religious purposes and
worship* as that which was convened and held at the Music
Hall, at Leeds, on the Ist of February. It was not autho-
rized by the rules or canons of the church, or by any statute
of the realm, but rather comes under the prohibition both of
the twelfth canon, and of the penal statute of 52d Geo. 111,
c. 155. It would seem somewhat more candid and consistent
to abstain from charging the Church Pastoral Aid Society
with ecclesiastical irregularity, at a meeting not very regularly
convened and conducted, if the above-mentioned canon or
statute have any meaning and application to such a meeting.
1 forbear commenting on the extreme modesty with which
individual clergymen indirectly, but publicly, impugn the
conduct of their respective and excellent diocesans, for sup-
porting the Pastoral Aid Society. (But I would just enquire
whether such indirect attacks on the bishops made by pres-
byters at public meetings and printed pamphlets, are calcu-
lated to support " episcopal authority," or to produce respect
for the episcopal office? If the clerical supporters, and I
have the honour to be one of the supporters of the Church
Pastoral Aid Society, are ecclesiastically irregular in support-
ing that society, it is. the province of their ecclesiastical su-
periors to correct them: to the directions and authority of
those superiors, officially given, y will, I doubt not, yield
obedience; while they may hesitate to recognize authority,
or yield to the opinions, of two presbyters—the vicar of Leeds,
and the vicar of Rochdale.)
impediments may be
all that
My hope and prayer is,
* " Prayers having been offered."—Leeds Intelligesper,
p. 7, Feb. 6M.

To the above objections an implied charge is added, that
the Church Pastoral Aid Society is not CATHOLIC. It is
quite as much so as its junior sister—" The Society for the
employment of additional Curates," unless this latter society
comprises the Universal Church of Christ. But if by the
alleged uncatholicity be meant that the Pastoral Aid Society
does not pay men for substituting the puerilities and absur-
dities of the Romish Catholic Church, for the Holy Scrip-
tures, and the scriptural doctrines a the Church of Christ
as established in this realm—to the charge, the society will;
I trust, be able to plead guilty. Or if by uncatholicity it be
meant that the Pastoral Aid Society has, in making or with-
holding its grants, a regard to the value of the living' as well
as to the population—to this charge also the society will plead
guilty. I know that an application was some time ago made
to the Church Pastoral Aid Society for a grant in part of pay-
ment to a lay reader in a parish containing a population of
eleven thousand souls. But a grant was refused, because
the incumbent received £6OO a year from his living, though,
out of that sum, he paid a liberal stipend to his curate, and
diligently shared all the duties with his curate adhering to
his parochial duties.
But, " the Society for employment of additional Curates"
is somewhat more liberal, though perhaps not more just, than
the " Pastoral Aid Society ": for, the former, I perceive, by
a resolution passed at the Music Hall meeting, maintains six
curates in the parish of Leeds ; though the income of the in-
cumbent is £1,300 a-year from the living, to provide for the
religions instruction of his parishioners ; and though there
are many other churches built and endowed in the parish, by
the munificence of individuals. No doubt, under even these
circumstances, the vicar of Leeds feels himself justified in
receiving, and the committee of the " Society for the em-
ployment of additional Curates " feel justified in appropria-
ting, for such a purpose, part of the fund of a charitable in-
stitution—though a fund partly formed by the contributions
of clergymen who are scarcely able to provide for their own
families.

To all the foregoing remarks it may be replied, that to
prove that one society is wrong, does not prove that the other
is right. True. But it may remind the objectors of the old
adage that " they who live in glass houses should be careful
how they throw stones "; or of the more appropriate admo-
nition of our blessed Saviour,—Mat. vii. 3-5.

In reference to the lay agency paid for, but the agents nei-
ther appointed nor directed, by the " Pastoral Aid Society,"
I am not prepared to condemn or to justify the payment for
lay agency : though in doing this, the society does no more
than what is done by other approved church societies. But
.I .aminelined to think that if the grants appropriated to Day
lay persona, were devoted to employ regularly ordained cler-
gymen—more good would be promoted, and an impediment
would be removed, which impediment has prevented many
excellent, conscientious men clerical and lay—supporting the
" Pastoral Aid Society," a society of incalculable value.
I am, sir, late incumbent of Marsden, in the diocese of
Ripon, ED. EDWARDS.
Wrexham, Feb. 22, 1841.

t " The stipends of the 270 incumbents assisted by the so-
ciety (i. e. Pastoral Aid Society) average only £263 a year—
one half of the cases having no glebe or parsonage houses."—
Rev. 1. B. Marsden at the meeting at Bradford.

EXPORTATION OF BRITISH MACHINERY,

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

Stn.,—lt is satisfactory to learn that the important subject
of the exportation of machinery is now introduced into par-
liament, although brought forward by Machine Machine,
by petitioning for the removal of.all restrictions ; yet the
investigation and discussion must be beneficial, as it will
elucidate one important fact, that, the removal of all duty
and restriction on the exportation of British invention may
benefit machine makers for a short time, but the measure
will inevitably ruin the cotton and woollen manufacturers of
Great Britain, and bring certain misery and want on many
thousands of our countrymen. It is an undeniable fact, that,
the great commercial pre-eminence of .this country arises
solely from the astonishing invention and great superiority

of machinery adding such Unbounded facility to our manu-
factures. It is that alone that has enabled us to compete
with foreigners, notwithstanding their advantages of cheaper
food, lower wages, and fewer taxes. An exemption from
all restriction will consequently give to foreigners an unfair
and undue preference over the honest and industrious work=
ing classes of Great Britain. There is recently a lamentable
deficiency of orders from the United States and many of the
European States ; the reason is too evident : the rapid ex-
tension of manufactories for cotton and woollen goods in the
United States, France, Saxony, Belgium, Switzerland, and
other countries. The manufactories are entirely indebted to
the promptitude they have been supplied with all our new
invention in machinery, which has lead to their establish-
ment, and which is operating against our great liberality.
The advocates for unrestricted exportation of British ma-
chinery urge it principally on the ground that restriction
produces smuggling. Granted that it does to some degree,
is that a reason that other countries should be almost over-
whelmed with our machinery. But it is ascertained the
greater proportion of our fine mechanism has passed the
customs under the name of tools, and by other evasive means,
entirely owing to the undefined and inoperative acts of par-
liament.

It is surely an excess of free trade liberality that would
bestow on other nations the fruits and benefits of British in-
vention, thereby depriving of employment a large portion of
our fellow-subjects.---Yours, &c., L.
Newcastle-on-Tyne, Feb. 24.

THE EXHIBITION OF PAINTINGS AT THE
POST-OFFICE GALLERY.

Some very beautiful paintings have been added to the gal-
lery this last two or three days, which we now take an op-
portunity of describing. We recommend our readers to
visit this very excellent collection : they will be greatly de-
lighted. The first work of art we shall notice is numbered
10. " The Transporting the Holy Casa de Loretto."—
This very remarkable picture was obtained by Rosasphina,
a Bolognese painter, from a convent in Tuscany, who sold
it to Prince Beauharnois. It was then purchased by Lucien
Bonaparte, who sold it to the Queen of Etruria. She left it
to her son, the Duke of Lucca. It has just been resold to a
foreign potentate for 2000 guineas. The subject of the pic-
ture is the Virgin and Infant Christ being transported to Lo-
rctto, attended by angels. St. John and two saints are look-
ing up with rapture and reverence on the miracle. This
picture bears about it. all the remarkable style, touch, and
tone of the Caracci School. In the figure of St John it is
especially exhibited, as the drapery is precisely the same
as that of the cap of the boy in the " Curing the Blind," and
that on the man's head who is leaning over the end of the
bier in that of " Raising the Widow's Son." The folds are
broad and massy. The fleshing is natural and of a clear
tone, and the limbs are finely proportioned. The head of St.
John is replete with intellect. The figure is in a kneeling
posture. The centre figure represents one of the Saints who
is invested with sacerdotal garments. The head is expres-
sive
of sanctity and veneration. The attitude is graceful and
dignified. The folds of the white garment are beautifully ar-
ranged. The white is very pure, and the light thrown upon
it is very clear. The figure to the right represents another
Saint in a dark robe. The face is in profile, and is a fine
study. The hands in all the figures are charmingly expressed.
There is a lovely cherub at St. John's feet, who is handling
some jewels and chains in a golden salver. This little crea-
ture has a most exquisite expression of face. The landscape
is of a blueish cast. At the top of the picture is the Virgin
with the Saviour in her arms seated on a chest, surrounded
by clouds and cherubims. The glory is very brilliant. This
fine picture will only remain on view a month. It will be
greatly admired for its excellent colouring and execution.
17. " Virgin and Child"—Paris Bordone. A deeply-
coloured, rich picture.—Bordone was a pupil of Titian.
22. " Holy Family"—Parmegiano. A very delicious pic-
ture, equal almost to Raphael. The Holy Family is repre-
sented in the wilderness, with a friar holding an open book
or missal. These figures doubtless are portraits, and this
strange anachronism has been introduced to suit the fancy of
those for whom the picture was originally painted. The dra-
pery and fleshings are most exquisite. The purity and bright-
ness of the tones are astonishing. The arm and hand of the
Virgin are very graceful : the fingers are remarkable for their
length and symmetry. The depth of the background forci-
bly brings out the beautiful colours of the figures. Their

arrangement is also most graceful. This pure and chaste
work of art will be highly admired by all who have an eye to
beauty in design and delicacy of colour.—Francisco Mazzu-
oli, commonly called Parmegiano, was born at Parma 1503,
and died 1540, aged 37. The Italians, who highly admired
him, styled this artist Parmegianiqo (darling little Parmegi-
ano). He was, it is believed, the scholar of Correggio, and
closely studied his works. Parmegiano is celebrated for his
correctness of design, and the harmonious softness of his
colouring. Without being an imitator of Correggio, he is
almost his equal. It is to be regretted that a painter en-
dowed with such talent should have been so early cut off.
His works are now very rare.

PARISIAN IMPIETY.—The blasphemous and shocking
titles selected for dramatic productions within a few years
have already been referred to in your correspondence, but I
have not seen it remarked that the new favourite dance at the
fancy and masked balls at the Theatre de la Renaisance tran-
scends all that preceded it. The title of this dance is Galop
infernal du dernier Judgment The costumes of the dancers
and their postures are copied from Michael Angelo's picture
of "The Last Judgment !"—Correspondent of Me Times.

IMPORTANT TO CARRIERS.—The following case came be-
fore the Justice of Peace Court of Edinburgh on Monday,
the 15th instant :—A hamper was booked by Messrs. Raimes
of Leith Walk at Mr. Taylor's, the Leith carriers' quarters,
on the 17th October, for Messrs. Jefferiss and Co., Medical-
hall, Dalkeith, which hamper should have been conveyed to
Dalkeith that evening, but through negligence it did not ar-
rive at its destination until the 21st October, causing injury
to Messrs. Jefferiss's business and disappointment to their
customers. The carrier pleaded, in excuse, that he was en-
gaged in taking goods from the steam-boats on the first day,
and on the third day (the Sunday intervening) his man for-
got it. The Justices found him liable in the amount of pro-
fit on the good, 25s per cent., and expenses.

THE LATE TRAGICAL OCCURRENCE AT MITCTIAM.—The
prisoner, whose name, it appears, is Thomas Moss, not
Potts, as was stated in the former account of the proceedings,
was on Wednesday brought before Mr. Elyard, at his resi-
dence at Streatham, for final examination upon the capital
charge of shooting at Emma Moss, his wife, with intent to
murder her. The unfortunate woman was brought from
Mitcham in a fly. Her face was blackened all over from the
effects of the gunpowder, and it is feared that her eyes are
very seriously injured. The prisoner, the moment he saw
his wife brought into the room, turned his head away. He
never looked up nor uttered a word during the inquiry,. and
appeared to be almost in a state of insensibility. Emma
Moss was then sworn. She deposed, that on Tuesday even-
ing last she had been to chapel, and was returning home
about 9 o'clock, when near her own house she met the pri-
soner, who said, "Emma, is that you ?" She joined him,
and asked him if he had been to her father's, and he replied
he had not, and by this time they had got to her mother's
house, and just as she raised the latch to go in, the prisoner
put a pistol under her bonnet, close to her face, and fired it
off. The prisoner had left her about a month before, and she
had not seen him till that evening. They had no angry words,
and nothing more occurred than she had stated before the
prisoner shot her. The prisoner was fully committed, upon
the charge of feloniously shooting at his wife with intent to
murder her.