worthy of the condemnation of the Church in Synod assembled, as inculcating erroneous and strange doctrine." And surely this is what the Upper House might have said and ought to have said with all weight, authority, and solemnity, if only in mercy to the little ones of Christ. And we believe it would have said so but for being led away by the error of a lax public opinion supposed to exist out of doors, which it feared would not understand the difference between a Synod condemning a book for unsound doctrine and a court trying a criminal for an illegal act, and which uninformed public opinion would perhaps consider the act of the one body as an unjust prejudgment of the question submitted to the other. But even the most ill-informed public opinion would not fail to see the distinction drawn. above in a parallel secular case. In the face of an impending inundation, who would say that the possibility of

conclusion than that the compulsory silence of a hundred and forty years was as much less hurtful as it was less guilty than such a course. We trust, however, that the Bench of Bishops in this matter were rather merely misled by a popular error, and mistaken through an unexamined and unweighed plausibility, than that they had any thought or intention of thus betraying their trust, or of consciously shrinking from their duty as guardians of the Faith in so grave a crisis. In this hope we will abide until we see what the suspension of proceedings finally amounts to-whether, that is, it be bonâ fide only an adjournment, or whether it is only another name for abandoning them altogether.

neglected or damaged the embankments ought to act as a reason for those in authority not making full inquiry, and issuing a necessary warning as to imminent danger from a flood? In the apprehension of invasion by an enemy, who would question the lawfulness of the Government examining into, and, if needful, condemning the weak points of defence, or any vantage-ground which might fall into hostile hands, much more any indications of walls sapped, or garrisons tampered with treasonably, even though it might be that further proceedings might be taken elsewhere as to traitors within the camp? In time of plague or pestilence, when rumour perhaps asserts the wells of a district to have been poisoned, who would say that no commission of inquiry must issue, no examination be made, no report, and, if need be, condemnation of the polluted fountains be proclaimed, because it might happen that certain contractors were under arrest as not having fulfilled their duties, or as suspected of abusing their position to the poisoning of the waters? Surely, in all such cases, not only is salus populi suprema lex, but it would be felt and understood by all that the conclusions come to, and the declarations promulgated, would deal with the facts as they stood, irrespective of the persons who might or might not be implicated. And would any man in his senses suppose that the labours of any such commission must cease, and their condemnation of unsafe embankments, or dangerous points of assault, or poisoned waters, be suppressed and stifled, pending proceedings taken judicially against any man as a criminal in connection with such impending dangers? And the parallel really holds good even though, in the book case, the authorship being admitted, it may be said that you necessarily prejudice the writer if you condemn the book; for in any of the other cases put the argument might be the same, inasmuch as the defence in the criminal proceedings might be that, admitting the prisoner's connection with the works, the embankments were not unsound, or the fortifications were not ill constructed, or the waters were not deleterious; in which case the defence would not the less be prejudiced by an official condemnation of the state of things inquired into than the writers of the Essays would be by an authoritative condemnation of their book.

We need hardly pursue this train of thought further. We trust we have said enough to show that a very serious, and we must add, wholly superfluous error has been committed in the suspension of Synodical proceedings in It is an error much to be regretted for itself and its immediate consequences, by the which, we scruple not to say, the little ones of Christ's flock have had grievous wrong done them, and many dangers increased. But even more is it to be taken as a ground of sorrow and alarm if it be received as an indication of the purpose of the Synod as to the use, rather we must say the abnegation, of her, to a certain extent, restored powers. A thousand witnesses does God give to the truth that He helps those who help themselves, but if the Church of England has been so enfeebled by the Erastianism of the day that the highest "powers that be" in the Church come only to overlook their duties, abdicate their functions, and suppress their action, when they have again given them the power to act, we fear we can come to no other

Church in the Manufacturing Districts.

HE position of the Church may be viewed in different aspects. First, statistically, with reference to its means of public worship and ministrations, its schools, and various other material and external machinery, for promoting religion generally, or its own special tenets and polity. Secondly, with reference to its estimation in the opinion and affections of the people.

For our present consideration we select the latter aspect, as one to which passing events invite more than ordinary attention. Errors in public opinion itself, and mistakes as to the real direction of that opinion, have caused great practical evils. Fallacies have been allowed, without exposure, to take possession of the public mind; and insidious encroachments have been gradually effected without notice, till Churchmen were awakened from dreams of security and apathy by finding, that the spoliation of the Church and its separation from the State were avowed as the ulterior object to which the abolition of Church-rates was a step designed. The startling majorities in the House of Commons in favour of abolition significantly cautioned us of the dangerous consequences, resulting either from an unsound state of popular opinion, or from an erroneous estimate of its real tendency and extent. rapid and steady dwindling of those majorities, before the aroused energies of Churchmen, encouraged us to nurture sound public opinion, and to expose the specious appearances which are confounded with it, either through want of reflection and knowledge, or through the fallacious devices of an organized association, having at its command a well-worked machinery and plenty of money.

The

These parties well know, and unscrupulously use, the power of what is termed "outward pressure; a phrase which designates an effect without distinguishing the various causes by which that effect may be produced. The effect of pressure may be produced either by public opinion, properly so called, and formed deliberately under appeals to reason only, or under those retarding checks which give time for the dispersion of prejudice and passion; or the pressure may be effected by overpowering caprice or blinding excitement; or, again, by a mistaken belief of a preponderance of public will upon any subject. In establishing such a mistaken belief respecting the tendency and preponderance of public opinion or popular will, as adverse to the Church, the successful resistance of Churchrates in the manufacturing districts has been of some weight, and has induced legislators to support measures which their own judgment condemns. This success (though extending to only about five per cent. of the sum total of parishes) has been inconsiderately adopted as a demonstration of popular will so decided that resistance is useless, and the demands of the Church-rate abolitionists must be conceded.

That the chief power of dissent is in the large towns, and is therein great, admits of no question; but we deny that it is as great as it is believed to be by those who take the successful resistance of Church-rates to be an accurate

criterion of its magnitude. An examination of the issue raised, and of the parties combined, in Church-rate contests may throw some light upon the value of success, as evidence of the relative positions of the Church and dissent in the public opinion of the manufacturing districts.

1. The issue raised was simply rate or no rate-not the comparative merits of the Church or of the voluntary system-nor the question of an Established Church or no Established Church. The design of seeking Church-rate abolition only as a step to separating the Church from the State was kept in the shade. Cupidity was tempted, under colour of oppressive taxation, to appropriate to holders of property liens upon it to which they had no right. Obedience to law was represented as violation of conscience. Stage management, in putting Bibles to be seized under distress warrants, and in conferring the honours of martyrdom on persons who suffered the consequences of self-will against public law, caught the sympathies of the ignorant. There was no appeal to calm judgment even upon the rate itself, much less on the position of the Church in general estimation.

2. The parties contending were not the Church against the power of any one sect, nor the Church against the whole combination of sects; but the sects were reinforced (we believe in a very large proportion) by those allies which are easily evoked for any tumultuous purpose in large towns, with a dense population demoralized by various causes, and especially by having outstripped the means of pastoral superintendence. The irreligious, the dissolute, the idle, the turbulent, and the factious, delight in riot and profanation. As they readily answer the first call, they also readily return again and again to scenes in which they delight. The friends of order and piety shrink from these painful and disgusting doings. If once induced to discharge the naturally unattractive duty of upholding a charge upon themselves, they easily yielded to the terrorism and persecution which were used to intimidate them. The gaining of a numerical majority, by such means and by such allies, was no more to be taken as a demonstration of public opinion, properly so called, in favour of dissent, or against the Church, than would be the voice of the misguided rabble who blindly supported their envious misleaders in demanding the release of a robber and the crucifixion of the Holy One.

Not even on the mere question of rate or no rate does the successful resistance prove a numerical majority who, if calmly consulted, would support the refusal of a rate. For, under all the disadvantages and difficulties referred to, there have been trials of strength proving that the hold of the Church on the affections of the people would, if it could be brought into action, be superior to the whole combination of the sects and their motley allies. In support of this opinion we cite the Rochdale contest of 1840, the greatest recorded trial of strength on this question. No less than 13,075 votes were polled, and the rate was carried by a majority of 113. This majority was carried against personal violence and assaults so outrageous, that a large body of police were overpowered; and towards the close of the poll it was necessary to call out the military to enable the Church party to record their votes. The then The then rapid increase of these votes is evidence that, if protection had been sooner afforded, a much greater majority would have been gained.

It is admitted that the Church majority could not be induced to follow up this victory. They yielded to weariness of strife-to disgust at profanation-to persecution to costly litigation, supported by the funds of a wealthy central association, evading the intent of law by a vexatious use of its imperfections. But this rather supports than invalidates the assertion, that the success achieved is not evidence of a preponderance of public opinion, or even of popular prepossession, against the Church and in favor of the voluntary system. The majority, obtained under fallacious issues and against terror and calumny, was obtained against dissenters combined, as we repeat, with the factious, the turbulent, and the irreligious. The position of the Church as compared with that of dissent is high,

even numerically, and in the large towns the strongholds of the latter.

But the central directors of the agitation (presuming that outward pressure by resistance of Church-rate had effected all it could in causing a majority of the House of Commons to believe in a decided and irresistible condemnation of Church-rates at least, if not of the Church itself) now proceeded to unmask their ulterior design. The mask, of the burden of taxation, and of oppressed conscience in the payment of Church-rates, was cast aside. Before a committee of the House of Lords the ulterior intention to separate the Church from the State, and to confiscate its temples and endowments, was openly avowed, and prominently put into the foreground of the movement.

The

But the effect was very different from the anticipation of the movers. It brought to light true public opinion. Churchmen were aroused into action. They appealed to the calm judgment of the people, not to excited mobs, but in tracts, in lectures, in references to history, and even to dissenting authorities. The clergy had heretofore shrunk from bitter controversy and odious comparisons with dissenters, till the latter challenged or compelled such comparisons. The challenge was unwillingly accepted by the former; but, once accepted, was fearlessly and successfully carried out. Dr. Hume's statistics-the convincing eloquence of Joseph and James Bardsley, Stowell, O'Conner, Eagar, Venables, Dr. Miller, and other clergy of the manufacturing districts, (to say nothing of those in the South,) spread light on all sides upon the venerable claims and practical usefulness of the Church, and upon the shortcomings, inconsistencies, and fallacies of dissent. response of true public opinion was given in unmistakable clearness through the whole manufacturing districts, from Newcastle to Birmingham. Church defence, and operative auxiliary, institutions sprang into active life in Hartlepool, Durham, Leeds, Bradford, Huddersfield, Preston, Halifax, Ashton, Oldham, Manchester, Liverpool, and many other great towns, the vaunted strongholds of dissent. Church lecturers there addressed, with success and welcome, large audiences freely admitted, and left dissenters unmolested to do the same. The alarm with which the latter regarded the effects of these fair appeals to reason was speedily manifested, in their spasmodic agitation to stifle the religious census honestly challenged by the Church-in the pharisaical attempt to throw dust into the eyes of the people, to exalt themselves, and to lower the Church, by means of the "Bicentenary" bubble--and lastly in rude and lawless interruptions at Hartlepool, Birmingham, and Huddersfield, to drown lectures which they dared not leave to the free judgment of the people. The mere political dissenters, and those who represent hostility to the Church to be the essential principle of their creed, have made a great blunder in challenging an appeal to public opinion, and they know it. Not only have they aroused in Churchmen a spirit of defence and inquiry, but they have presented to the notice of pious and well-meaning men (prepossessed against, but not ill-disposed towards, the Church) materials for thought and information on subjects heretofore mystified and misrepresented. There are signs that many of these will discern the truth, and be gathered into the Church. We were informed by a clergyman that, after the Rev. Joseph Bardsley's lecture in the Free Trade Hall at Manchester, nine dissenters declared themselves convinced, that the objections to the Church were unfounded, and expressed their determination to join it.* The holy activity of her clergy in these districts, the proofs that the preaching of the Gospel to the poor, not the desertion of them for more profitable localities, is the policy of the Church, and is practically secured by its endowments, -the demonstrations that a Church with its pastoral charge and lawfully defined district is widely different from a building and minister merely for prayer and preaching,-the dissemination of

*See A Contrast between Conscientious Nonconformity and Factious Dissent, presented in the Christian Appeals of Edward Ash, M.D., to Nonconformists; and especially in his Right Way of Commemorating the Bicentenary of 1862.-Wertheim and Macintosh. Price 2d.

these facts is doing its work among the thoughtful and intelligent people of the North. The position of the Church in their estimation has been rapidly improving, and will receive a glorious impetus from the assaults intended to lower it-if not to sink it altogether.

On the Evidence for the Existence

of Infidelity.

HAT there exists within the pale of Christendom an alarming and distressing amount of infidelity is, unhappily, a fact beyond the reach of dispute. Nevertheless, it is quite possible that unbelievers may overrate the amount of their own numbers, and we are about to suggest some reasons why such an error on their part should be extremely probable. We must begin by the admission that the mistake of exaggerating the size and influence of one's own party, combined with a proportionately lowering estimate of the opposing ranks, is by no means confined to any one particular sect or school of thinkers. We are all naturally inclined to look upon our own world as the world. To give one illustration of this principle, out of many that might be selected, we may for the moment refer to the First Impressions of England, by a Scotch Presbyterian, the late Hugh Miller. In that work the author sets forth an explanation of the unconscious self-deceit practised by English dissenters in their estimate of the relative forces of those opposed or attached to the Church of England. He shows how, by living among themselves, by frequenting their own inns, by dealing with their own shops and the like, they contrive to remain in a state of well-nigh invincible ignorance of the strong hold which the Church retains upon the affections of the majority of the nation.

But in the case of an energetic sect, which holds anything like a positive creed, this sort of ignorance must necessarily, from time to time, receive some very rude shocks, such as may at the least serve to shake if not to overthrow its self-confidence. A creed must needs lead to action, and action inevitably discloses unforeseen weaknesses. To raise a chapel or a college, to carry through Parliament some cherished scheme of national education, to send out missionaries to the heathen, these and similar attempts tend to reveal the real condition of the power and influence possessed by a given community. The funds are not easily raised, fit teachers for the various branches of knowledge are not at hand, the strength and tenacity of opponents proves far greater than was anticipated, and though some progress is ultimately effected, yet many a sanguine adherent has in the meanwhile become a sadder and less hopeful, though it may be at the same time, a wiser man.

But to the professors of a merely negative theology these startling revelations are but rarely vouchsafed. Engaged simply in undoing, they need scarcely face the difficulties which confront every earnest Christian community which, in its degree and according to its light, is engaged in attempting to build up. Unbelievers (at least the highly cultivated ones, who are at present more especially in our thoughts) seldom make serious and self-denying endeavours to found institutions, or to frame laws, or send ambassadors to distant tribes. To gain a footing in existing seminaries, to guide legislation in a latitudinarian direction, and to keep up certain organs of opinion, seem to be much more congenial avocations. Such tasks being comparatively easy, do not necessitate the same stern looking of facts in the face as those more aggressive ones to which we have previously referred.

But not only does such a measure of success as may attend these efforts on the part of sceptics tend to fan their hopes, they also derive a considerable degree of support from a mistaken view of human nature. Most of us, who are not either open reprobates on the one hand, or models

of saintly and heroic virtue on the other-in other words a majority of mankind—are so changeful and inconsistent as to resemble two distinct persons. Now it is the common error of worldly and sceptical minds to assume that the lightest aspect of another's character is the truest. Whereas, on the contrary, nothing is more certain than that many a one whose life and conversation gave but too much countenance to the notion that he was an unbeliever, or

else quite careless of religion, has exhibited in sickness or in danger substantial proof, that a deeper and better self had all the while lain hid under a seemingly frivolous or materialised exterior. The man who talked lightly about religion over his wine has constantly displayed a very different demeanour in illness, or shipwreck, or captivity. Even the avowed sceptic has not always sufficient confidence in his professed conclusions to carry them out consistently. D'Alembert commenced his will in the name of the Holy Trinity; Diderot gave his sons a religious education; neither Rousseau nor Voltaire professed to feel any security upon the subject of future punishment; and a celebrated gambler and profligate who died in 1732, Colonel Charteris, is believed to have offered 30,000l. to any one who would assure him that there was no such place as hell. And yet most of those just named would be claimed by the sceptic as the very leaders and apostles of unbelief. The greater, the more signal their inconsistency! In truth, hard as is the task to be a consistent Christian, it is still more difficult to be a consistent unbeliever.

"Naturam expellas furcâ, tamen usque recurret," excepting where the expulsive principle is the loftier and more potent one of Divine Grace.

To return, however, to our infidel, who is thus summing the number of his allies. Having counted as on his side the greater number of those of whose levity and want of confirmed principle he has had some evidence, he may probably proceed to claim a very large staff of literary coadjutors. Here, again, he has but too much reason for his vaunt and yet we cannot doubt but that it is often proclaimed far too loudly. Thus, for instance, the author of a celebrated article in the Westminster Review, for October, 1860, assures us, that "the newspaper, the review, the tale by every fireside, are written almost exclusively by men who have long ceased to believe. So, also, the schoolbook, the text-book, the manuals for study of youth and manhood, the whole mental food of the day; science, history, morals and politics, poetry and fiction." What the writer probably means is that he himself belongs to a set who would look upon this state of things as a desirable consummation. For that any man should really believe it to be a true picture of existing facts must surpass, we should imagine, the credulity even of Westminster Reviewers, credulous as they are upon points where they wish to believe. Waiving the question of anonymous writing, on which the evidence would be too complex for us to analyse in this brief sketch, we should like to ask, where is the proof that the Laureate, or Robert Browning, or the late Elizabeth Browning, or Adelaide Procter, have long ceased to believe? At what period did this deluge of utter scepticism engulf Messrs. Dickens, Thackeray, Trollope, Sir E. B. Lytton? Trollope, Sir E. B. Lytton? Where is the proof of unbelief in the works of Dr. Whewell, Sir Wm. Hamilton, Mr. Hallam, Lord Macaulay, Professor Owen, Sir John Herschell, and the long list which might be extended until the four or five really eminent writers of the sceptical school would be seen to form but a small fraction of the staff of British authors of our time? (We here confine ourselves to Great Britain, partly because it is of our own country only that the reviewer whom we quote is speaking, and partly because we are less immediately concerned with other lands.) As for manuals and dictionaries, the most prominent are those produced by Dr. Wm. Smith and his collaborateurs; and though we may not always approve of their tone, it would be the height of uncharitableness to stigmatize it as infidel. As regards the clergy, it were strange indeed if, among some 18,000, there were no black

sheep in point of faith as well practice; but to pretend that, (in more than some very few and exceptional cases) they disbelieve what they teach, is simply a scandalous libel. Indeed, the more courteous and tolerant among sceptics do not profess to bring against the clergy any such frightful charge; they are content to say that the profession of a teacher has so warped the minds of those who have undertaken the office, that they cannot be looked upon as unprejudiced witnesses. In speaking thus, they indeed tacitly assume that they themselves are quite free from all bias. Alas! too often they have a keen interest in denying truths which they have reason to fear may be intimately connected with their own lot; and thus this imagined freedom from prejudice is but one more instance of their selfdeception. Another time we may perhaps attempt to show cause why even a triumph of unbelief in any country can never be expected to endure for more than a short time.

Marriage Licence, Special and

Ordinary.

HE granting of licence ordinary for marriage is part of the old dispensing power exercised by Archbishops and Bishops, and was preserved to them by 25 Hen. VIII. c. 21. The same statute preserves to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his successors the granting of special licence. These powers have been recognized in our Marriage Acts from time to time, and are part of the present law.

The granting of a licence, special or ordinary, is purely a matter of grace, so that no Archbishop or Bishop who sees fit to withhold it can be called in question for his refusal.

A licence is commonly regarded only as a piece of luxury and magnificence; part of the paraphernalia of a wedding; and little is thought, or perhaps known, of the solemn words in which it runs. This is not wonderful in the parties who seek and obtain it. But the question is about those who grant it.

There is, then, a very grave scandal which has arisen within the last two or three years out of the general legalizing of divorce, and out of the marriage by licenceof which there has been already one, if not more instances -between the parties whose adultery has been the ground

of divorce.

Now, whatever may be said by some about the Scriptural authority for divorce in cases of adultery, no one pretends that the intermarriage of the adulterous persons can be reconciled with Scripture. But, nevertheless, such persons apply for and obtain a licence for marriage. They have no mind to face publication of banns, and find that they may more secretly and conveniently be married by

licence.

Now, observe the form in which a licence runs:"To our beloved in Christ, health. Whereas it is alleged that ye are desirous to proceed to the solemnization of true and lawful matrimony, we, being willing that these your desires may the more speedily obtain a due effect, and to the end that this marriage may be publickly and lawfully solemnized . . . . according to the rites of the Book of

Common prayer ... for lawful causes, graciously grant this our licence and faculty, &c. &c."

It will not, we presume, be contended that these are fitting expressions to be addressed, and fitting permission to be given, to persons who are preparing to break Christ's law; or that such permission is to be made matter of special favour and encouragement on the part of Christ's chief ministers. If the law of the land makes such a marriage legal, no man will say, at least no Churchman can say, that "legal" is necessarily the same as "true and lawful," or that it can be the same in this case. We shall never counsel disobedience to existing law; but to obey law is one thing; to volunteer acts which the law does not require to be done is another thing.

cese.

The point, then, we would submit is this, that in no such case may licence for marriage, ordinary or special, lawfully be granted; and that it should be well understood throughout every diocese, and especially by all surrogates and other official persons, that this is the rule of the dioIn these days of failure of spiritual discipline it would be something, however small in itself, to see the Archbishops and Bishops exercising their legitimate and undisputed authority to this extent. It would be something to see the name of Christ not invoked, and the giving due effect to true and lawful desires predicated by His chief ministers in giving formal permission to sin.

Our attention having been urgently called to this matter, we would strongly urge upon clergy and laity in every diocese that they represent the case to their diocesan. It must have escaped the notice of the Archbishops and Bishops; and there can be no doubt that a respectful petition to them, in the sense of what has been here set down, would have its prayer granted, and that one at least of the causes of scandal and offence and reproach by the adversary, arising out of our internal condition, would thereby be done away.

We desire here to guard against a possible imputation that, in our judgment, such marriages may lawfully be had after banns, but not by licence; we regard both as equally breaches of Gospel law and profanations of the Prayerbook. But we would not have Archbishops and Bishops go out of their way to give facilities for sin. Such marriages may be legally celebrated at the Registrar's office.

Committee of Council on Education and their Codes.

JOMBINATION, pro-Parliamentary and Parliamentary, is a good thing for purposes of defence, and now and then for purposes of assault; but it may be had too dear. It has just defeated, or appeared to defeat, for the real issue is not so clear, the re-Revised Code of Mr. Lowe.

Now many men are very happy about this, and go about One man thinks that the congratulating one another. training colleges are safe, another is glad about managers, another about masters and mistresses, another about pupilteachers. Some go as far as to say, with especial blindness, real or assumed, to primary facts of the case, that no harm has been done to the principle of religious teaching in schools of the Church. In short, people very generally appear to think that, after all, things are to go on very much as they did before. But no one appears to think that much is going to be done to help the poorest; the lack of which help, as contrasted with the help given to the richest, has been the main blot of the old system. There has been a defeat and a victory over a very unpopular thing, and a very unpopular man, and this is pretty much the amount of it—

"And everybody praised the man
Who this great fight did win,
But what good came of it at last?'
Quoth little Peterkin;

'Why that I cannot tell,' said he,
'But 'twas a famous victory.''

Now we, too, are very glad of the defeat, because there seems no room to doubt that the re-Revised Code and its author deserved any amount of defeat, not so much because of the ostensible principles of the Code, for these are in themselves unobjectionable and even praiseworthy, as because of its negations, and the manner in which both principles and negations were handled, and all brought to bear against the Church.

But we are not glad of the victory, because we are neither satisfied with the quantity nor with the quality of it; neither with the way in which it has been achieved, nor with what has been achieved. And if any man, obB 4

serving the compliments and the courtesies of the early part of the evening of Monday, May 5, in the House of Commons, when

"Friends to congratulate their friends made haste, And old inveterate foes saluted as they past," should have inferred from them that all was nicely settled, he must have had his repose unpleasantly disturbed at its close by the majority of seven, in a house of 320 members, upon the primary issue presented by Mr. Walter's motion.

A piece of patchwork like that now turned out of the Westminster workshop is not going to hold together. It includes all the chief blots of the old system; only it is less pleasant to look at because the harmony of the colouring is much disturbed by bits done in here and there by a new hand.

There are some vicious principles, or, at least, some faulty applications of principles good in themselves, which underlie the whole arrangement, and which, quite apart from all considerations of economy, or of political hostility to the Church as supposed to be especially interested in its preservation, make its existence very precarious now that attention has been more closely called to it. For example, the principle of giving aid out of the parliamentary grant in proportion to the amount locally contributed is excellent as a general principle of public economy, but is only very partially applicable in the present case, because any rigorous adherence to it is inconsistent with the primary object of Parliament in making the grant at all, viz. the bringing school teaching within the reach of the poorest. Again, the restrictions upon the management of schools under the "management clauses," never tolerable, have their injustice more developed in proportion as it is seen that it is not the way to make clergy and laity work harmoniously together, to proceed upon a jealousy of the clergy for which there is no sufficient ground. Again, that the possession of a certificate of some kind by a teacher should be a necessary condition of aid is found not only to be unjust in proportion as the maintenance of the teacher is thrown more upon the managers, but it is seen to be unwise, and to be conceived in ignorance of facts which make the employment of certificated teachers every day more a matter of difficulty in the country parishes. All these vexations and unnecessary interferences with the liberty of the subject cannot ultimately be maintained. There is no fear that without certificates the supply of fitting teachers either in town or country will fall short of the demand. It may all be very convenient to have training colleges subsidized at the rate of from 90 to 100 per cent. It may be all very reasonable in Sir James Kaye Shuttleworth to make desperate efforts to avert the fate of his unhealthy offspring, but that is his affair, not ours, and we had rather not be called into consultation in the case. The main mischief remains; that which we had specially in view when we said that combination may be had too dear. Mr. Lowe's attempt to follow up the blow aimed at the National Church by the majority of the Royal Commissioners in proposing to confine State aid to the encouragement of secular teaching-a blow only not dealt because of the protest of the minority-and thus to separate between the interest of the State and the interest of the Church in the religious teaching of Church of England schools, has not been disguised. It does not matter much to the Church what Mr. Lowe may say or do, but it matters a great deal to the Church upon what principles she meets Mr. Lowe and his friends. Now, with some few exceptions, the opposition of Churchmen to his Code has played into his hands. What has been extracted from him by main force is stuffed into a footnote, and the whole amount of it is negative. The combination which has produced the glorious victory, and the patchwork flag under which opposite parties are marching now, has set aside, from first to last, as inconvenient and improper, all reference to the special relations which subsist between the State and the Church of England in respect of religion and religious teaching, and has found a way which to Churchmen has no soundness in it, because

The International Exhibition of 1862.

MONTH has elapsed since the opening of the Great International Exhibition to the public, yet even now the vast aggregation of the multifarious products of art and manufacture assembled in the huge, unsightly pile at Brompton can scarcely be said to be reduced to complete order. Many blunders of arrangement have, however, been rectified. A way has been opened through the blocked-up nave, and the communications between the annexés and the principal parts of the main building have been much improved. Fine works which were huddled away in corners have been disinterred, and placed in more fitting positions, while inferior productions, which had, somehow or other, hustled themselves into the most conspicuous places in the building, have been made to retire to parts more in accordance with their merits, and in which, if they had been so placed at first, their good points, if they have any, would have been sure to find acknowledg ment, instead of their obvious defects being loudly and angrily challenged when placed in the front rank, to the exclusion, in many instances, of works of the highest merit. These ameliorations have been the result of the determined attitude assumed by the newspaper-press, backed by public feeling, as the press will always be when not exceeding the limit of its legitimate powers. The thorough independence of our press is, in fact, one of the results of our free constitution, of which we may be the most proud.

At the ceremonial of the inaugurative opening we observed the reporter of the Times, and other reporters too, in the best places of the foremost row of the reserved-seats, the very élite of the peerage and the prelacy sitting behind them in far inferior positions. But was any subservience purchased by this preferment-not a single word. Nor, in all probability, was any influence sought or hoped for, even by the unpopular commissioners, to whom a little printed flattery in the columns of a leading paper might have acted pleasingly as a gently soothing unction, after the storm of reprobation raised by the jobbery which has resulted in the creation of such a truly hideous mass of brick and mortar, and the utter want of taste and judgment which afterwards so badly distributed the beautiful products forwarded from all parts of the world to our great decennial Exhibition. But as all has been made right at last, or nearly so, if we can but make sure of every vestige of the monster-shed being swept away after the Exhibition is over, we may very well forget former grievances, and enjoy the spectacle of the most magnificent assemblage of works of art, science, and manufacture, including specimens of natural produce, that the world ever saw assembled.

It is true that some few objects of exalted merit, which were among the chief attractions of the Crystal Palace of 1851, will not be equalled by any single work of precisely the same class in the present Exhibition. In bronze statues, for instance, there is nothing equal to the famous. Amazon, by Kiss of Berlin, or, perhaps, to Baron Marochetti's Richard Coeur-de-Lion. Nothing that will entirely supply the place of Ostler's glistening fountain of glass, that cast up its cooling spray where the great transept intersected the noble length of the well-remembered naves.