arrived, as in the proof it affords of the fact, that, by all bodies of Christians by whom the apostles' creed was received, (that is, in England,) by the members of the Established Church, and of all the dissenting communities then known, the doctrine of the holy Trinity was also received and believed; and it is by the current acknowledged use of language at that day, that this deed is to be construed. In the latter deed, therefore, I think Lady Hewley expresses her clear and undoubted intention, that no Protestant Dissenter, who denies the Divinity of Christ—that is, no Unitarian-shall partake of her bounty. My Lords, in answer to the last question proposed by your lordships, I would state my opinion to be, that Unitarian preachers, and their widows, and other persons professing Uuitarian doctrines, are capable at the present day of receiving the benefit of charities similar to those mentioned in the deeds of Lady Hewley, whenever they shall be properly described in any deeds of endowment; and that I see no distinction to be drawn between charities of one description, or for one purpose, and those for any other; for I consider, since the statute of 53 Geo. III., chapter 160, all distinction between Unitarians and other Protestant Dissenters, as to this purpose, is by law taken away. My Lords, these are the several answers which, upon the best judgment, I can offer, and I submit them entirely to your lordships' consideration.

LORD CHANCELLOR.-I move, your lordships, that the further consideration of this case be postponed, that your lordships may have time to review the very elaborate arguments contained in the opinions of the learned judges.

LORD BROUGHAM.-My lords, I entirely agree with my noble and learned friend. The learned judges, in the case of Doe v Perrot, and of the Attorney-General v Shore, have presented to us most able and elaborate arguments, and afforded us the greatest assistance in forming our final judgment in these cases, which have now stood over for a very long time. I trust that, with the assistance we have thus received, we shall be able to dispose of both of them in the present session.

LORD CHANCELLOR.-In a very short time, I hope.

On Friday, August 5th, this promise was redeemed, though the Lord Chancellor was absent from the House of Lords through indisposition.

Lord Cottenham rose and said—My lords, the opinions which have been delivered by the learned judges have so far exhausted this case in all the most material parts of it, that I do not deem it necessary to enter at large into the very interesting and important matters which were discussed at the bar.

The principal object of the suit was, to have it declared that ministers or preachers of what is commonly called Unitarian belief and doctrine, and their widows and members of their congregations, or persons of what is commonly called Unitarian belief and doctrine, are not fit objects of the charity. The decree appealed from established the affirmative of that proposition; and of the seven judges who attended the hearing at the bar of this house, six concurred in it. I cannot suppose that your lordships will think that there is ground for differing from this opinion, and if that should be your lordships' feeling upon it, the result will necessarily be an affirmance of the decree.

I cannot, however, omit to make some observations as to the media through which this conclusion has been arrived at by the different authorities by whom this subject has been considered. Your lordships will have observed, that in the discussion in the Court of Chancery, a very large range of evidence was admitted, with a view of coming to a decision as to what was the intention of Lady Hewley, which could, after all, only be judged of by the language and terms used in the deeds. In what respect and for what purposes this evidence was properly received, was the subject of one of the questions put to the learned judges, and has been the subject of some difference in their opinions. It does not appear to me necessary to consider minutely those differences, because I conceive that, keeping strictly within those

rules which all the opinions recognize, there is sufficient, upon the view taken by the great majority, to support the conclusion to which they have come upon the main point in the case.

It was very clearly and shortly laid down by Mr. Baron Gurney, that that part of the evidence which goes to show the existence of a religious party by which the phraseology found in the deeds was used, and the manner in which it was used, and that Lady Hewley was a member of that party, is admissible. That being, in effect, no more than receiving evidence of the circumstances by which the author of the instrument was surrounded at the time.

Much evidence appears indeed to have been received, which, if of a nature to be received, might fall under this rule, but which was objectionable upon other grounds, such as the opinions of living witnesses. But rejecting all such evidence, enough appears to me to remain unobjectionable in itself, and properly received for the above purpose to support the conclusion to which a great majority of the learned judges have come. I have thought it right to make these observations upon this matter of evidence, otherwise the affirmance of the decree might seem to sanction the receiving all the evidence received below, which might tend to introduce much doubt and confusion in other cases.

It may be thought that this opportunity should be taken, of specifying what description of persons are hereafter to be considered as proper objects of the charity. I think that any attempt to do this would be dangerous, and would be more likely to promote than to prevent future litigation, as it is impossible a priori to foresee the consequences of any such declaration, or to have sufficient information as to the various interests upon which it may operate, and which are not represented in this suit. What has passed in this cause, and the valuable opinions which the judges have delivered, will, it may be hoped, afford such light to the trustees as to enable them satisfactorily to administer the funds for the future.

It was made part of the complaint upon this appeal, that some of the trustees had been removed, as to whom it had not been proved that they entertained opinions inconsistent with the declared purposes of the trust. I do not consider the removal of any of the trustees as implying any reflection upon their moral conduct; but as, by the decision of the court it was found that the application of the funds for the time past had not been consistent with what appeared to the court to be the real object of the charity, and as a large discretion must necessarily be left to the trustees for the future, I think, that, as a matter of discretion, it was right to select others for the future management of the funds; and if that was right in 1833, it would certainly be indiscreet to adopt a different course in 1842. I cannot, therefore, think that it will be right to alter this part of the decree.

I propose, therefore, to your lordships, to dismiss this appeal, and I see no ground for departing from the usual course of giving to the respondent the costs.

LORD BROUGHAM.-My lords, I agree with my noble and learned friend, that your lordships ought to dismiss this appeal, and, as usual, unless under very special circumstances, none of which exist in this case, with costs.

My lords, this cause was originally heard before me in the Court of Chancery, all but the reply. I had the assistance of two learned judges, though, in consequence of my giving up the Great Seal before the case was fully argued, no opinion was given, and none, indeed, was formed by me, in the absence of the reply. My noble and learned friend, who succeeded me in the Court of Chancery, heard the case through, according to my recollection, and gave the judgment which your lordships are now moved by my noble and learned friend near me to affirm.

The opinions of the judges undoubtedly have been of very great use to your lordships in the examination of this somewhat difficult question; and I agree with my noble and learned friend, that it is advisable for your lordships to come to the deci

sion to which the opinion of a great majority, six out of seven, of these learned persons, would naturally lead. I am also of opinion, that it must be considered, that, in giving this affirmance to the decree, your lordships do it under the qualification which has been stated by my noble and learned friend, with respect to the reception of evidence.

LORD CAMPBELL.—My lords, having argued this case as counsel at your lordships' bar, I entirely abstain from taking any part in the judgment. Decree affirmed with

costs.

We cannot close this historical notice without congratulating those gentlemen who have prosecuted this suit to a successful issue, through a lengthened period of sixteen years, on its happy close; and especially rejoice that it has pleased God to continue the lives of the first movers in this struggle, Mr. George Hadfield and the Rev. Dr. Bennett, and of the senior relator, Mr. Thomas Wilson, and of the laborious solicitor, Mr. Joseph Blower, to witness this remarkable triumph of truth and rectitude. We should not do justice to our own convictions, if we did not add, that the indefatigable researches of Mr. Joshua Wilson have greatly assisted the counsel in their labours, of which his "Historical Inquiry concerning the Principles, Opinions, and Usages of the English Presbyterians, from the Restoration of Charles the Second to the Death of Queen Anne," will be a standing memorial.

PROPOSED UNION OF THE SCOTCH PRESBYTERIANS AND THE WELSH CALVINISTIC METHODISTS.

In the proceedings of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, in May last, and also at the meeting of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, in July, there were references made to a union that is contemplated between "the Presbyterian Church in England" and the Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.

As this is, on many accounts, an important movement, and has been announced, as our readers will perceive, with no small satisfaction by the parties interested, we present them with the particulars.

On Wednesday evening, May 25th, Mr. M'Naughten, of Paisley, reported to the General Assembly, that he had been one of a deputation that had attended the Synod of "the English Presbyterian Church," held lately at Carlisle, and closed by introducing a deputation appointed by “the English Synod," the Revs. Hugh Campbell, Manchester, Robert Wallace, Birmingham, W. Grant, Tweedmouth.

Mr. Campbell then addressed the Moderator, in a speech, which it is not necessary to criticise, but the following is the passage that refers to the Welsh Methodists. "Having thus been united among ourselves, we have begun, as will ever happen in a united, loving, orthodox body, to look around for other similar bodies with whom to enter into union, and it happened, most providentially, that, while we were thus disposed, there was a most highly respectable body, consisting of 500 congregations, professing our own faith, and maintaining almost all our distinctive forms, who were at the same time with brotherly feelings looking towards us. Some private communications had taken place between individual members of both communions, in which the strongest desire was evinced for a closer fellowship, if not a bona fide union. In order to avail ourselves at once of this favourable conjunction, we appointed a deputation to attend the next annual conference of the body to which I have alluded, to explain our principles, to ascertain theirs, and to do every thing, in short, that in them lies, to promote a union from which so very much of good must result to both parties. The project, as you perceive, Moderator, is quite in its infancy, and, therefore, it would be improper in me to dwell upon it at a greater length."

That deputation, consisting of the Rev. James Hamilton, M.A., of the Scotch Church, Regent's Square, London; the Rev. Peter Sawers, of High Bridge, New

castle-upon-Tyne, and Mr. Barbour, a ruling elder, of Manchester, and the Rev. Dr. J. Brown, of Agadocy, Synod of Ulster, in Ireland, went to Bala to attend the Association of the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists for North Wales, on Tuesday, 7th of June.

In the evening of that day a special meeting was held, to receive the deputation; and at a meeting of the preachers and elders, held on the following morning at eight o'clock, the subject was taken into consideration, when it was observed, “The strange brethren have not come to ask us to make any change in the constitution of our body, nor in anything that we have, in order to our uniting with them. They ask for nothing but a friendly union-that we should love each other as brethren-and send letters and visitors occasionally the one to the other. We see them in all things unassuming men like ourselves; and like ourselves acquainted with the plague of their own hearts-looking to Christ as their Saviour-and desirous for the extension of the kingdom of the Redeemer. It is very reasonable that we should acknowledge each other as belonging to the same family, although there are some differences between us which will prevent us from mixing much with them. Most now predict, that Christians of every denomination must unite: the enemies of Christ are confederating together, and it will, therefore, become necessary for all the church of Christ to make a general effort against the foe."

It was noticed also, that it was requisite to consult the brethren in South Wales before framing any particular measures in reference to the subject.

It was then arranged that the brethren, Rees and Hughes, of Liverpool, and Edwards, of Bala, should correspond with the Presbyterian Church in England, and with the Association in South Wales, thereon, and that they should call to their aid any whom they might wish.

On the election of the Rev. Professor John Edgar, D.D., to the Moderator's Chair, in the Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, held at Belfast, on Tuesday, July 5th, that gentleman, in his inaugural speech, referred, amongst other topies, to the progress of the Presbyterian system, and said, "A sun of promise has arisen to the Church that I trust will never set. There is a hopeful prospect before us of a union with a body whom we have long respected and prized, and I have no hesitation in saying, that I look forward to the happy time when Welsh Calvinistic Methodists will form with us but one body in heart and spirit; and it is well known that there is a large and influential body of the Dissenting ministers in England grown dissatisfied with the democratic tyranny, and become desirous of the independence of Presbyterianism."

Now, as we have given our readers an account of all that was said and done at Bala, in June, they will think with us, that the proceedings there do not justify the worthy Professor's unhesitating expectations, and will throw light upon the accuracy of his assertions respecting the dissenting ministers of England. The Presbyterians of both lands will find the Independents of England willing to be united with them. "in heart and spirit" too, if they will not be content with a cold orthodoxy, but wil maintain purity of communion and eschew the regium donum, which we hold to be the reproach and bane of the Presbyterian bodies in both countries.

ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS.

Favours have been been received from Rev. Drs. Hoppus-Styles.

Rev. Messrs. W. Walford-J. H. Godwin-W. Tarbotton-A. Wells-C. GilbertT. Timpson-George Smith-R. Ashton-G. Taylor-Thomas Giles-E. LewisA. Tidman-H. J. Rook.

W. Stroud, M.D. Messrs. C. J. Medcalfe-H. Owen-J. Palmer.

W. S.'s Reply to Mr. Conder has been received, and will appear next month.

THE

CONGREGATIONAL MAGAZINE.

OCTOBER, 1842.

A MEMOIR OF THE REV. JAMES ROBERTSON,
OF WELLINGBOROUGH.

A SHORT period only has elapsed since my communication of a brief memoir of the late Rev. H. W. Gardiner, of Barnstaple, was inserted in your miscellany. I am now called upon to furnish some account of another long and much beloved friend, the Rev. James Robertson, late minister of the Congregational church in Cheese Lane, Wellingborough, who departed this life on the twenty-third of June last.

I shall commence this memorial by an extract of a letter written to me, since my friend's decease, by his sorrowing widow, who is left solitary and childless, to mourn the departure of a most affectionate and beloved husband. "I know but little of my dear and honoured husband's early life: many things that he related to me of his youthful days are, I am sorry to say, now forgotten by me; my mind has been, for the four last years and a half, so completely absorbed by his distressing affliction: all, however, that I do know, I will state. He was, as you probably know, a native of Newcastle-on-Tyne; and his father was connected with shipping affairs; but in what way, or what his business exactly was, I am not able to state. He was, I know, a Dissenter, and brought up his family to attend regularly at the house of God. I have often heard my husband most feelingly lament the death of his mother, whom he lost in early life. As his father married again, he had a most uncomfortable home: and I have often heard him say he was cruelly treated by his step-mother. He was, however, sent to a good school, and many times spoke of his master in the highest terms, and of his very excellent plan in instructing youth. His thirst for knowledge was at this time so great, that nothing, he used to say, gave him so much pleasure as a new book.

"On leaving school, he was put apprentice to a grocer. Whether or not he served his time fully out I cannot say, though he probably did, as he was not very young when he entered at Wymondley. During his apprenticeship, when the business of the day was over, he regularly spent his evenings with his highly esteemed pastor, whose name was, I think, Smith: with him he used to read, and from him he received