The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-12-02 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL "r'rANDARD.

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE LIVERPOOL

'TOWN COUNCIL

GIiNTLEMEN,—In the letter which I had the honour to ad-
dress to von on the 18th instant, I said, "The Irish extracts
are unfairly made," and I promised to address another letter to
yon, in proof of, this assertion. .I .proceed now to redeem the
pledge thus given ;—premising only, that a volume, rather than
a letter, would be required, to exhibit anything approaching to
an adequate exposure of those books. A characteristic speci-
men of their unfairness may, hOwever. be compressed within
moderate limits. I shall endeavour to do this. „.
The subject is of the highest importance • beCause all the'
children who attend your schools, who cansead at all, are Com-
pelled to use the books in question ; and it is a fact of which the
Protestant community are not sufficiently aware, but of which
they must be plainly informed, that the religious instruction
given in those schools cannot be impartial, because it is con-
veved through the medium of books which are unfairly com-
piled. I observe, that in your debate of last Wednesday, the-
charge of unfairness advanced against the Irish lesson-hooks is
not adverted to. It is, indeed, a serious charge, and demands
explicit proofs I now present you with some of them.
We protest against the lesson-books printed by the Irish
Board, and used in your schools:
Ist, Because of the new translation of Scripture which they
contain. _ _

2,1, Because of the notes which they contain.
3d, Because they elevate the Dnuav and Rhemish versions
into a position of parallel authority with our authorised version.
4th, Because they inculcate Roman Catholic doctrines.
First, we object to a new translation of Scripture by the
Irish Board.
• The Commislioners of Education Inquiry, in 1821. recom-
mended the experiment of a lesson-book for national schools.
A volume was accordingly prepared, which is to be found in the
Appendix to the ninth report of the commissioners. The
Roman Catholic prelates, however, objected to this volume, oil
the ground that it was taken verbatim from the Protestant ver-
sion of the New Testament. In Archbishop. Murray's letter
eou
bp
joenett,4l7
,s, nitt, j
pe
uc tr,(De c
ports t
~)2por,e
sleBn2Gt
to children
report,
the inspired2o .)h thusewo
(i
" of God, and vet it differs from the translation which those
" children are lank to consider authentic." This was consi-
dered a sufficient objection. 'The question was nut as to the re;
spective merits of the translations as such. It was deemed un-
fair to unsettle the minds of children by• present them with
a new translation.
in
With this fact before us, we turn to the lessons now use in
your schools. No. lis a new translation of portions of Genesis,
interspersed with portions of the Psalms, and of the New Tes-
tament. The preface opens with these words :—" These les-
sons, as the name imports, are drawn from the sacred volume.
and are almost entirely in the language of S'eripture,,traeslated
literally trom the original:" The extentair 'the novelty of this
translation will appear froav the fact. tharn the first lesson,
consisting of two pages and a half of alSmall book, there are
ninety and nine varnitions'from the authdrised version. I have
traced and reckoned the variations in those portions of ,Genesis
down to chap. xxvi., which are introduced into the lessons, (just
one half of the Lesson-book No. 1,) and find them amount to
one thousand one hundred-41nd two! lam not now speaking of
differences which involve doctrines, but merely of differences
which stamp novelty upon the book, thereby unsettling the mind
from all associations of reverence for theauthorised version, and
therefore unfit, most unfit' and unfair, to be forced into the
hands of Protestant children. -We adopt against this book the
prime& facie objection which Dr. Murray urged against its pre-
decessor of 1824-5. It purports to present to children the inspired
Word of God, and yet it di fifers from the translation, which those
children are taught to consider authentic. Let it be known, then,
to the Protestants of this town, that in sending their children to
your schools, they are, sending them where they will he com-
pelled to lead, as Scripture, a new translation. Are Protestants
prepared to alloti the authorised version of the Bible to be so
tampered e ith ? The fact of a new translation being prepared,
and put into the hands of Protestant children, is of itself an im-
putation against the old one. And the effect of references to
varying manuscripts, readings, points, &c., can only be to create
an impression that no certainty can be found in the Scriptures.
This is precisely the consummation at which the Roman Catho-
lic church bad always aimed, in her elevation of unwritten tra-
ditions into equal authority and reverence with written revela-
tion. That church assumes the existence upon earth of a living
infallible tribunal. Protestants deny this, and allege that there
is nothing infallible upon earth but the written Word of God.
It, therefore, the minds of Men can be hrotlght to make the in-
quiry with uncertainty, which Mr. Thos. Button is reported to
have made its your Council-chamber,—" What is the pare and
unadulterated Word of God? That is the question.' What are
the Scriptures?"—if this state of mind, I repeat, can be pro-
duced in the rising generation, the whole affair is settled the
foundation of truth is undermined; and the result mpst be either
utter scepticism as to revelation altogether, or unexamining
prostration under the arrogant claims of
.11omisii
It is, therefore, the most natural thing imaginable that the
Church of Rome should rejoice over a new translation put into
the bands of Protestant children. 'Those Children are compel-
led in your schools to read the new translation as the Word of
God. They go home and find the authorised translation as the
word of God. These two differ in hundreds and thousands of
places, the one from the other. What is, what must be, the re-
sult ? Is not Mr. Bolton's question actually"ferced upon the
children. " What is the pure Word of God, what are the Scrip-
tures?" Thus confidence in all versions of the Bible is shaken ;
no standard of certainty is left; we are bereaved of the testimo-
nies and commandments of God; and thrown upon the doubt-
ful reasonings and corrupt traditions of men.
If, in answer to this, it be argued that the Irish lessons are
not intended to sersede the authorised version, and that it is
so distinctly state. in the preface; we reply, either this new
translation of Genesis is an improrement upon the authorised
version or it is not. If it be an improvement, why should it not
supersede the other? Why should we sanction such a super-
stitious reverence for antiquity as to retain an old inferior
version when we may adopt a new superior one? If the new
one be indeed an improvement, let us have it by all means, and
discard the old one. But if not, if iruprovernent•be not even
aimed at, if it he not designed to supersede the old one, why
make it at all? Is it made out of pure love of translating for
translating sake, without improvement? Mr. Carlile says that
" he was couipeiten by the exigency of the case to undertake
the task."—Preface. In what t6—* nxigencv
net informed; that Mr. Carlile sincereit7r
-t
en that account,
pot we do not doubt; but- the effect is.
u t$
snaL theta haver; ; been forcedll't eutvp4orn;thifeallpgunLisnl public by v'bi.aydruiaaoniusy:
public body. They remain, and are useful, in the libraries of
the learned. But a new translation, forced by authority into
the hands of the rising generation, cannot fait to contribute to
the grand design of the Romish Church to throw uncertainty
over what is the Word of Gcd ! It would have been a inure
impartial course in itself, and a thousand times less pernicious
in its consequences, to have taken the lessons verbatim from the
Douay version and the authorised version, alternately, than
thus to have introduced a new version, fraught with fresh ele-
ments of uncertainty. Thus, on the simple ground of novelty
in the translation, we utterly reject the lessons as unfair. If
it be said they are equally unfair to tl Roinish and reformed
churches, we answer no; because, a leading object of the
Romish church is, and ever has been, to prod-ace 'uncertainty
as to the written Word of God, while it has been equally a
leading object of the reformed churches to dissipate all such
uncertainty.
Why, let me ask, does not Dr. Murray object to this lesson-
book, as he did to the book prepared iii 182-1-5? The objection
he urged against that, applies, in the letter of it, to this. "It
purports to present.to the children the inspired Word of God,
and vet it differs from the translation, which those children are
taught to consider authentic." Why, then, does he not object
to this, as he did to the former? The answer is, the former had
no tendency to create or increase uncertainty, being iu the
words of the authorised version; but this has an obvious tendency
to create and increase uncertainty, and therefore, although it
differs from the translation which Roman Catholics are taught
to consider authentic, it is not objected to; but, on the contrary,
its circulation is zealously promoted by Dr. Murray.
As to the comparative merits of the translations it is very
moderate Praise indeed of the forty-seven translators appointed
by King James I to say that they were more competent 'than
the members of the Irish Board. Those distinguished scholars
were divided into six companies. Ten were to meet at West-
minster, to translate from the Pentateuch to the end of the Sec-
ond Book of Kings. Eight, assembled at Cainbriulge, were to
finish the rest of the historical books, and the Hagiographa. At
Oxford seven were to undertake the four greater Prophets, with
the Latnentations of Jeremiah, and the twelve minor Prophets.
The four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and Apocalypse, were
assigned to another company of, eight, also at Oxford. The
Epistles were allotted to another company of sevei.4 at West-
minster. Lastly, another company at Cambridge were to trans-
late the A pochryphal books. According to-the regulations under
which the work bras-conducted, AO. each intlieirimai translated
ir•vstYb
ootoklie which
ap‘iteeds,..inallotted Johis company; secondly, the
readings
tech 4totik were agreed upon by the
whole of that company aisemlirect together"; and thirdly, the
book, thus prepared,, was sent to each of.tha other companies to
be again examined. At theeemeetings oncread the translation,
the rest holding Mitheir hands solue,hibleivither in the learned
tongues,,orin sotneinodern languegeu Al'lthey found fault, they
spoke; if not, he read on. The translation commenced in the
spring of 1607, and the completionuf its)ccupietl; nearly three
years. It was first published; iiiirolkeigklal,Arfutiite,
1, Lion, .vol.
With this history before us, we snooty wonder at the eulo-
' giutns which have beet) written iii commendation of our author-
ized version by scholars, of all parties.- In Mr. Hot ne's truly
vAanliuearbkl.ea.waolrik, just referred to, you will find the testimonies of
Seblen, Walton, Lowth; -Horsley, Middleton, Dr. Geddes,
elegance,Wltittake rs.trDetolgdtdhr.idge, -Dr. John Taylor of Norwich, Dr. Jas.
it.re.lat.ttie, Dr. Adam Clarke, and Professor Stuatt, of North
uniting- in eloquent,admiratiaeof theseccutarv,
learning;, pat hos,i aud sublimity ()lour un-
rivalled
is ao t to Mr. (,erble, or any ineMber of the
secondtl bßT:taterd, tond st:yreteheaitvewea
it:l:s:4):(e.i),art.i(t)euitit.tht,thuisdstraasitaslial ?Lin_
provement.

Seeing, then; that INthe
improvement is not
any
intended, fur ): confession of the. bond themselves,
superseding in
that novelty, without degree the authorised version ; and, seeing
we
tt,teiroveittent. can only he productive of
they disclaim all intention of
jection to the lesson-hooks unmixed mischief. Py thia our first, firm ground of oh-
-in your schools. We
know. by evidence not t, 'het"•used
whomso-
ever p i re d Scripture is, a n d w 0 ~,:tstr,:i.itaikliulh'uldi ::::i'ul,y'ita:lt.,:).l,ol,i'lltAa4.lllP.i.it.:•,,a,:t 1.,
eiiona.
buou9f:i
oinef-
atteinpt to throw discredit or utteert"..dYy,tv)rei.t:t:tagt4ahinesst,:iiliiii,y.
ever such attempt may be made, wit,uettl'rYnAt, by
deceived or by men who are deceivvrc-nt
2. We object to these books,
the NOTES which they contain, ~.
the'nYirit which..
t*Pif.o.o
,Church
has never sanctioned the circulation of an
tures in the uative.language-of the, people, Le•
itaott note* ch',
is notnrious. Ou the contrary, tließible abuts, 9outitAsii's the eels_
Zinn of protestant,. . We have not for,,vitteir
animated Protestant 13ritain, when churchnieti aiiii)l'i
of all denominations proclaimed from the thousand
bible societies. with the authOrised version iu their hand,,
of
" The BA/6, the uth Lae Bible, anti.NoTHiNG nice the Bible,'" :j'---
. The
distinguishing characteristic of genuine C.hristianity.,is, that '
rests exclusively on the Word of. Qod, i I,: t'
w,t-T..kinte or C-otilit
mew, The distinguishing characteristic or Runianisw is, that
it holds notes antl_cominents tube indispensable. Here, a..gaio
the Irish lessons are unfair, because they !eject the Protestant
principle, and adopt,the ltomish. practice. 'lhey contain inul-
titioles of notes and c•omments. Some 'of these notes are ver.
'intim from the Romish Bible, and inculcate must obnoxious
Runtish doctrine; and yet in vonr sehoolS the books containing
siieb notes are rot ced into the hands of Protestant children
and they are compelled to read them, and tube examined in
them. Let the Protestants of Liverpool hear and know this,
One of the:notes in question is this, on the celebrated pro-
phecy in the third chapter of Genesis : " It shall crush, ,§irc ,
ipsa, she, the woman ; so divers of the' fathers read this. place
conformably to the Latin; others read it ipsont, viz. the seed.
. The sense is the same ; for it is by her seed Jesus Christ, that
the woman crushes the serpent's head. "—Note to the Douay
version on Genesis iii. 15. This note states what is not the fact.
Of the two readings, it save, the sense is the same. The fact is,
the sense is not the same. The one statement is, ipso, the
woman, crushes the serpent's head by her seed :' the other is,
;dstif'osenler,
imam the seed, crushes the serpent's Bead. - In the one case
the woman is .the agent, and her seed an instrument ; in the '
other, the seed of the woman is the agent. Now, ,as the woman ,

and the,seed of the woman, are not the same person, the sense
of the two statements' is not, end cannot be, the same sense.
On the conti-arr, the one is Protestant, that is Scriptural, doc-
trine, and the other is Roman Catholic, that is unscriptural,
doctrine.

Commenting in defence of this note, Mr. Blackburn says,
"That the woman bruised the serpent's head by her own power
or agency, is not the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church.
That glorious work, they, in common with Protestants, ascribe
to the Lord Jesus Christ."
Flow far Mr. Blackburn is, in this instance, acquainted with
the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, will appear from
the following facts First, in the return made to the House of
Commons, August 17, 1833,.0f the hooks to be used by Roman
Catholics, in the hours of separate religious instruction, with
the sanction and approbation of the board, we find " Reeves's
history of the Old and New Testaments." Secondly, in this book,
so sanctioned and used at one period of the day, by children,
who at another period of the day, read the lessons, this pas-
sage occurs, " Mary was the woman destined by Almighty
" God to crush the serpent's 'head, as it is written in the
" book of Genesis, (chap. iii,) and it was to obtain her consent
" that God then sent his angel to Na►zareth." Here, the crush-
ing of the serpent's head is ascribed to t3►e woman, without any
mention of her seed. This passage in Reeves's hook, gave
Krise to a curious examination of Dr. Murray, by the commis-
sioners. Reeves is a Roman Catholic expositor. His book is
adopted for instruction in Roman Catholic doctrine. His state-
ments of doctrine are sanctioned by the Roman Catholic mem-
bers of the national board, .1,-..lltiling Archbishop Murray. But
Mr. Blackburn assures gas, that what Reeves states to he the
doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, is not the doctrine of
the Roma❑ Catholic Church. Is not this in effect, however
undesiioed, to misiepre:,ent the Roman Catholic Church?
Gentlemen, I have been accused of Misrepresenting that church-.
I have already asked when and where? And now 1 will say,
that if any person will have the kindness to point out to ►ne, in
any of my writings, such a palpable misrepresentation of Roman
Catholic doctrine as the above, I will publicly retract it, and
expess my ►incere thanks to the friend who shall have pointed
it Out. _ . _

Lithe-lesson-book professing to contain St. Luke, the follew-
nig note occurs at page-3: "Because - thou has not believed, .4-e.
Zacharias might no: be blameable in doubting, /or what he saw
might hate been an illusion ; but he sholld have waited the event,
which would hare decided. Craving, however, an immediate sign;
lie received one, whiCh was also a rebuke:"
The Scripture says that Zacharias received his rebuke, not
because he did not suspend his belief and remain in doubt until
the prediction was verified by the'event, but because he did not
steadfastly believe it as soon as it was foretold. The angel does
not say, Because thou wilt not wait the event:" but, " because
thou hrixt not believed." Yet the commissioners pronounce that
"Zacharias might not be blameable in doubting !'fhis
note, then, contradicts the Bible, and teaches the harmless-
ness Of scepteisra 'respecting a divine revelation.—Christian
Examiner.
In lesson xxiii, seven notes are given respecting the fall of
Peter. The last of them is in these words :—" Peter's ?client-
awe was immediate, sincere, and lasting, and he was in conse-
quence received into favour again, and continued, till his death,
a faithful and undaunted champion in his blessed Master's
cause."

Here the commissioners, in their anxiety to exalt St. Peter
in the minds of the children, and to wipe away the slain from
his character, appear to have forgotten that on a subsequent
occasion he again showed that he was not undaunted, but, "fear

ing them of the circumcision," was guilty of " dissimulation ;"
for which St. Paul domed it necessary not only to censure him.
severely and openly, before all who were then present at Antioch,
but subsequently to record this censure in his Epistle to the Ga.
latians.

On Acts xv, 7, this note occurs : " Peter here states the origin
of the whole dispute and discussion !" The commissjoners say
not a word to call attention to the marked tone of authority in
which St. James, the bishop of the infant church, and the presi-
dent of the assembly, gave his decision. But endeavour rather
to fix observation on the part which Peter took in the debate, as
if he were the principal person in the council, and opened the
business, although, in fact, he did not speak until tiller " there
had been much discussion."

The argument for the supremacy of Peter, which is deduced
.n the note on this passage in the Rheims Testament was too
glaring a falsification of the history to he transplanted in full
blossom into the pages of the Scripture lessons. The seed of it,
however, is sown ; and lest it should fail to produce the expected
fruit, it is watered by means of a question at the end of the les-
son, in these words: "Who first addressed the assembly ?" It
would be difficult for the children to answer this correctly, as
the inspired writer has not informed us who they were that took
part in the discussion beim e Peter spoke ; hut it is evident that
the commissioners had the old Rhemish note its their eye when
they constructed the answer to this question. It is as follows:
"St. Peter, as the head of the church, speaketh
*first, as his suc-
cessors have ever had, not only in their personal presence, but in
their absence, by their legates and substitutes the chief voice in
all councils general, none ever being received into authority and
credit in the church without their confirmation."
And in lteeves's History, and Gahan's abridgment of it, both
which works are sanctioned for the use of the Roman Ca-
tholics in the National Schools, it is directly asserted, that " St.
Peter, as president over all the rest, opened the subjects of de-
bate."—Vltristion Examiner.
Such instances might be multiplied, as you may see by re-
ference to two valuable treatises, the perusal of which I would
strongly recommend. One is entitled Au EXAMINATION OF
THE SCRIPTURE LESSONS, &c., by Henry Newland, D.D.,
Vicar of Ferns. The other is a reprint from the Christian Ex-
aminer, entitled A REVIEW OF THE SCRIPTUAE LESSONS, &c.,
with rin Appendix.
Again, then, I would ask, are books, containing such notes,
to be forced into the hands of Protestant children ? This is a
question loudly claiming the attention of the Protestants of Li-
verpool. Will they sanction schools during whose authoritative
hours of instruction, these books must be read, and the authoris-
ed version of the Bible must not be read? Will they be satisfied,
in the face of all this, with the plea, that for one hour, and that
the last and most wearisome hour, an hour, moreover, subse-
quent to the time at which the resolution of the Council says the
schools shall he considered closed,—that the Bible during this
one hour may be read, that is, it is nut prohibited, provided the
children remain, and some persons too_ es:psi/sand last Ltsegsmer-
sa s.r.ssid choose to s*** we are bound to take you at your
printed words, not at what may be your private intentions) is
this—"'That the schools shall be considered as closed at three
o'clock in the winter, and four o'clock in the summer."
Going home a few days ago, I went a little out of my way to
visit the north school, in company with my reverend friend Mr.
Lyons, about a quarter-past three o'clock. I asked the master
if the boys we saw sitting in the lower room were all the boys
of the school ? He replied, " All the catholic boys." I asked,
" Where are the Protestant boys ?" Lie answered, " Gone
into the Committee-room." 1 asked, " What are these boys
now engaged at ?" He answered, " Nothing, sir; lam keep-
ing them till the priest comes." We went up stairs, where we
found the Protestant children, both boys and girls, in one corner
of the room, and two ladies teaching them the Church Collect
for the following Sunday. The remainder of the room was oc-
cupied by classes of girls saving the Douay Catechism. After
some time we returned to the boys' room, and found them still
unoccupied, no priest or other teacher havingcome. Mr. Lyons
asked the master if he ever read the Bible with the boys? and
he said, " No, never." I did not ask him by what authority he
kept them after three o'clock, because I did not wish to excite
any feelings of dissatisfaction in his mind ; but 1 now respect-
fully ask you, gentlemen, by what authority the master, as in
the case above stated, keeps' the boys in the school after
three o'clock ? Is it by
.his own authority, in opposition to your
printed resolution ; or is it by the authority of unpublished
instructions from you ?
According to your own published rules, the schools are con-
sidered as closed at three o'clock in winter. Till three o'clock
the Bible is not, and must not be read. After three o'clock it
may or not be read, according to circumstances. If clergymen
can he found willing to go, then the Bible, after three o'clock,
may be read. But if the system be such, in other respects, as to
li deprive clergymen, on conscientious grounds, of the power of
availing themselves of the one hour, then, as far as they are
concerned, the Bible cannot be read at all. This is precisely
our position. The system excludes the Bible, except for one
hour. We cannot, by atteudiug during that hour, give our
sanction to this system,• so that, us far as we are concerned, the
system excludes the Bible altogether. I need not enlarge upon
our reasons for not being able to sanction this system. We can
sanction no system of education which does not enforce the
reading of the Word of God. We do not desire or attempt to
enforce attendance. Attendance is optional : but upon all who
choose to attend, we do and must enforce the reading of the
Bible: You were told on Wednesday, by one of your own body,
that to enforce the reading of the Bible was " not Protestantism,
but persecution." We do not think so. We think it sound
Protestantism, because it is obedience to the Bible itself, which
commands us to bring up children in the nurture and admonition
of THE LORD.
But we think the phrase is legitimately transferable to books,
which are not the Word of God, which are not extracts from
any known translation, but a new translation without authority;
and which contain notes by men, notes of at least doubtful in-
terpretatiou. To enforce the reading of these books, as is the
practice io your sch,:ois,
is indeed " not Protestantism, but per-
secution."
I have thus, under' the heads of translation and notes, given
you some of our strong; objections to these books. There re-
main other sources of objection, but instead of swelling this
letter to an incOuveuient size, I will reserve them fur another.
Meantiine, I am anxious to offer an observation or two upon a
statement made in your debate of last Wednesday. Mr. Black-
burn is reported to have said concerning my letter to you, "This
"'letter concluded in a style of denunciation. It must convince
"every gentleman who sat in that council, that the divine judg-
" menis were not at the disposal of the writer of it. He sup-
-'Utley were, he for ones and all who sat in the couocii
" who.dared to think differently, would fall under the writer's
" ban." These works may nut be quite correctly given; but to
.the Substance of this statement, or rather to the state of mind
which appears to have dictated it, I reply. that my letter con-
cludes with an earnest prayer, for the urgency of which a so-
lemn reason is aSSiglled in the very words of Scripture. I have
never either expressed or entertained a thought of evil towards
Mr. Blackburn, or any other member of your honourable couu-
cil If it were in my power to do any of you any real service,
1-would cordially rejoice in the opportunity. If I have at any
time written or spoken anything, beyond what the interests of
truth required, calculated to wound any of your feelings, I beg
to assure you, gentlemen, that I am sorry for it ; that nothing
could be more remote from my intention ; and that if I knew
wherein I have offended you, I would gladly apologise for it.
The subject is of much too high a character, and the interests
at stake vastly too important, to admit of anything approaching
to personalities.-1 have the honour to be, Gentlemen, with
much respect, your obedient set vaut,
St. Jude's, Yoe, 28, 1836. HUGH M•NEILE.

FA TA. r. Aceirw.NT,—On Monday morning last, John Osborn,
one of the porters at the railway station in Lime-street, in
running across the rails when the train was issuing front the
tunnel, came in contact with the buffer of a carriage lorry,
which threw him down, and the lorry and three of the carriages
expired
passed over him. He was alive on being taken up, but
almost immediately.
g r p.
oi i
~ Wg ei
vue
Inl dheerrset a
tnoil
ilri that large
e
Doinita TO Sin Hoag
all the surrounding
s.tozusrgatitisdh.liiies,.
tricts, as well as front Perthshire, Ayrshire. E.I
orders for tickets to the banquet to be
Peel. are pouring in from
&c.—ln the first place,agreed ti ion -•- fur
to 1200, will be laid aside; and,
us had been .up cot, 1
g . fßp.ets the
~a.ellretch(eqi)rie(niarintoensl
requisitionists here, amounting'
to secure against mistake regarding this point,
and addresses, arranged in alphabetical order,
the scroll previous to its being conveyed to Tatnworth.—The
'situation selected for the entertainment, in rear of Mr. Gor-
don's mansion in Buchanan-street, we believe is capable of
Containing a much larger assembly than has yet been announced;
but with every wish On the part of the directors to mite„ iiinodato
the gieatest possible number, that number Must be limited, as
it is well known, were the company so large ari to prevent them
from hearing the speakers, dissatisfaction and disappointment
mint be the consequence.7-it is possible we may be eased of
part of the rush of romoany from this east, as we olAerve, with
pleasure, by the Edinburgh papers of Saturday, that a requisi-
tion to Sir 'll6bert to accept of a public' inner is "the metropolis
of Seotland," has also been got up..'We shall,
however have
the first of the right honourable geutletuan at all evellts,—
Glavuw Herold.