Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

CO

bourne to walk up to the table of the House of Lords; we will suppose him to speak plainly, what he now vertly insinuates, and would not his language be such as this—“ My Lords, you know that the Irish clergy are starving, because they cannot get their property; my lords, you also know that the duty of the executive is to support the rights of property-but I think proper not to do so-I think fit not to secure one penny to the clergyI know very well that the Irish rebels will need less encouragement than this, to commence the war, and I am sure your lordships are very humane and kind, and so now here is the caseunless your lordships will just do as I choose, the clergy shall be left to misery for another year-not one penny of their incomes shall they get-and, perhaps too, if you should be very obstinate, some few of them may be murdered-I will take from their properties and lives the protection of the law; so my Lords, you have your choice." This would be the language of a heartless tyrant, and an unprincipled despot. Is it more than a free translation of the premier's hints?

Lord Melbourne employs the destitution of the Irish clergy as the means by which he hopes to coerce the House of Lords; he is trying an experiment, as it were, upon the humanity of the peers, and the endurance of the clergy. We have read of the tyrant, who when he wanted to extract a secret from the father, ordered the son upon the rack, and slowly increased the torture as the father remained silent; thus does Lord Melbourne deal with the clergy and the peers: he metes out suffering after suffering to the clergy, and he threatens to continue to do so until the peers will give up the church.

It must be borne in mind that the measure of settlement was in no way whatever connected with, or dependent on, the measure of confiscation; it must also be borne in mind, that it is the duty of the King's ministers to secure the rights of the clergy. These two things must be recollected, that it may be fully understood what Lord Melbourne does, when he thus threatens the peers with the destitution of the clergy. And what is the destitution of which politicians thus tamely speak, as if it were a matter of no moment beyond

the effects which it may have upon the interests of party? Alas! alas! we cannot raise the veil that hides the utter misery of many a respectable family, that would shrink from the exposure we cannot paint the destitution of those who are brought from affluence to beggary-It may be conceived, but not described. Last month

a

man high in literary eminence, sketched for our pages a picture of that destitution in a single and solitary case-but the pen that had often painted the scenes of fiction with a power that thousands have recognised

here fell far short of the reality. To us his sketch was tame, for we had wit nessed the reality. We have seen the sufferings of a virtuous family-the sufferings of which Lord Melbourne talks as if they were a thing of nought. If there be a man in the empire who is bound by every solemn obligation to defend the clergy, surely it is the premier-surely their sufferings should be more grievous to him than to the peers-and yet he points to them and says, "they shall continue until the peers do my bidding." We remember once to have known a savage father who was in the habit of barbarously ill-treating his child, that he might obtain money from a good-hearted person, who was in the habit of paying him to abstain from his brutality. Lord Melbourne seems to have taken the hint in his management of the church question; the principle he acts on is the same, to inflict misery upon the innocent-that he may practise extortion upon the humanity of the good.

We assert that it is the duty of the King's government to secure the rights of the clergy, so long as those rights belong to them by law. Let us turn to the King's coronation oath-an oath which the Whigs assert is binding upon the sovereign IN HIS EXECUTIVE CAPACITY; the King was asked by the archbishop:

"Will you, TO THE UTMOST OF YOUR POWER, maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the gospel, and the Protestant reformed religion established by law? and will you preserve unto the bishops and clergy of this realm, and to the churches committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do, or shall appertain unto them, or any of them ?"

And his Majesty answered in the sight of God and his people,

"ALL THIS I PROMISE TO DO," (and having laid his hand upon the Holy Gospels.) "the things which I have here before promised I will perform and keep, so help me God”—(and his Majesty kissed the book.)

The Whig ministers have told us that this solemn oath is binding upon the King in his executive capacityIN HIS EXECUTIVE CAPACITY THEN LET IT BE KEPT ; let the sovereign, as he has sworn, now "preserve unto the clergy of this realm the rights that do by law appertain unto them." Here there is no evasion-no escape; let ministers read over the words of the oath binding the executive king-that oath has pledged the monarchy to the upholding of the rights of the church, and yet the minister of a king who has thus sworn threatens the peers with a suspension of those rights as the penalty of their disobedience! Need we wonder if those, who thus disregard the conscience of their sovereign, are indifferent to the distress of his subjects?

And here we will venture to make a suggestion, which we trust will not be lost sight of, and which we particularly recommend to the attention of our cotemporaries of the daily and weekly press, who have much more powerful facilities of urging and stimulating public spirit, than can belong to a writer in the pages of a monthly magazine. The Protestants of Ireland should now demand from their sovereign the fulfilment of his coronation oath; this should be done speedily, and it should be done temperately and firmly; addresses should be presented to the King from the Protestants of Ireland, setting forth in the simple language of truth, the destitution to which the teachers of the reformed religion have been reduced by the wrongful withholding of their just dues. We should plead the words of his Majesty's coronation oath; we should respectfully, but firmly, remind him, that he has sworn before the King of kings," to secure unto the clergy of this realm the rights which by law do appertain to them." We should tell him, that their rights are now withheld, and that the men who exercise the functions of his authority, have

threatened or said, that they shall continue to be withheld; and then we should call upon our sovereign, in the name of that God to whom he swore, to fulfil the pledge of his solemn vow. Who can calculate the effect that might be produced by the united voice of hundreds of thousands thus pleading at the throne of their king, the promises which he made to us at the altar of his God? The guilt of a king has been often regarded as the crime of a nation, and if the guilt of perjury is indeed to rest upon England's government; if the monarchy of Britain is to be visited with the curse of a violated oath-let it not be at least without a loud and solemn protest; if we desire that the king should remember his vows, let us prove to him that we have not forgotten them. And before we can believe that the coronation oath is an idle form, and that its obligations are a thing of nought with our sovereign, let us solemnly remind him of that oath, and respectfully plead those obligations.

We trust that this will not be lost sight of; addresses to the king should be sent in from every parish, from every county. It needs but one active person in each district to prepare them, and once prepared, we will promise that they will be signed. A few simple words, and the fewer the better, will suffice to lay before his majesty the state of the clergy, and to remind him of the sanctions of his oath. Let the language be as firm as is consistent with respect; let the plain truth be told, that his Majesty has sworn to secure the rights, which are now, with the implied sanction of his ministers, withheld, and the awful inference may be left to his Majesty's own conscience.

The session is now closed, and the measures which during its progress have been passed, are before the country; it may be well to pause a moment upon the retrospect, and ask, "HOW MUCH HAPPIER IS THE COUN

TRY NOW, THAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, IF SIR ROBERT PEEL HAD CONTINUED IN OFFICE? How much did his removal promote the progress of improvement? What useful measure has been carried in consequence of that removal? It might be well to reverse the question, and ask in the way of progressive legislation, how much has the country lost? The Corporation Bill is Sir

Robert Peel's; this has gained nothing by his dismissal. And where is the Dissenter's Marriage Bill? Where is the settlement of the Irish Church question? Where is the reform of the English church? Where is the commutation of tithes in England? Where the settlement of church rates? Where the law reforms? All these measures would have been brought to an advantageous settlement under Sir Robert Peel's government-but Sir Robert Peel was dismissed to forward them, that he might no longer be an obstacle to improvement; and now, at the close of the session, with a reforming ministry, all these questions are still adrift; and it turns out, by the only unerring test, experience, that the progress of reform has absolutely been impeded by the change of ministry. The Whig cabinet have not perfected a single measure which would not have been just as well, and much sooner carried, had Sir Robert Peel remained in office; they have left many indefinitely postponed, which, had he been permitted, would have, months ago, been finally arranged.

These, if we mistake not, are considerations upon which the country will dwell. Here is the plain test of the patriotism of those who thwarted the King's prerogative, and removed from office the minister of his choice. How

MUCH BETTER OFF IS THE COUNTRY

NOW? This is a test intelligible to the meanest capacity, and yet decisive to the greatest; it is a test which all their fine speeches cannot evade. The country has lost measures of substantial reform by the return of the reformers to office. Out upon the base pretence that disguised their faction, under the mask of patriotism! They sought place, and they have obtained it-they have done as little in the work of reform as they could-they have left as many questions unsettled as they could. Perhaps they wish to preserve grievances to be the staple of the trade of agitation-nothing can be more grievous to the professional agitators than the prospect of tranquillity-a contented people would be the grievance-monger's greatest bane. Were a few more questions settled, his trade would be literally starved to death; but the settlement of these questions the reforming ministry have indefinitely

postponed; they wish the country to continue in a state of unquiet-that in the fever of excitement, men's minds may not have leisure to dwell upon the incompetency of those to whom the interests of the nation are entrusted.

We must draw our observations to a close-there are a few points not immediately connected with parliamen tary affairs, to which this may, perhaps, be the fittest place to allude. But first, we once more congratulate the country on the stand that has been made by the peers-they have triumphantly asserted their rights, and asserted them with the full concurrence of the people. "Collision" will no more be the bugbear that it too long has been-we have learned to estimate that terrible thing at its true value-we shall no more hear the peers counselled in the accents of pretended friendship, to preserve their privileges in the gross, by abandoning them in detail; advice which has been well compared to the conduct of the Irish general who protected his fortress by giving up all that it had been built to defend; or, if we may be pardoned for adopting a more homely, although academic, illustration-when we were told that the peers should pass all the bills that were sent up to them, lest their right of rejecting them might be taken away, we could not help thinking of the sage expedient by which the eccentric Dr. Barrett proposed that the College lamps should be protected from the nocturnal attacks of the disorderly students; "Nothing simpler," said the doctor, "than to take them down and lock them up at night.” We have read pages of counsel to the Lords, with respect to the conservation of their privileges, that seemed to us to be just as whimsically absurd,

We have said that there were a few points, not immediately connected with the subject of this paper, to which we are anxious to allude; perhaps we ought not, even so far as by speaking of it here we may seem to do, connect with politics, the approaching solemnities of "a day greatly to be remembered." Our readers are aware that the centenary of the translation of the Bible occurs in this year, and that it has been determined to celebrate its recurrence with all the Christian rejoicing that such an occasion is calculated to inspire. We will not so far

disguise our convictions, as not to acknowledge, that from this celebration we look for important political results, but the celebration itself is not political. And surely we are fallen on evil days-surely the spirit of infidelity has spread itself abroad, when there is found a party in the state who are ready to raise their voice against the proposed commemoration, on account of the political tendency it may have. Cannot Protestant England solemnly return her thanks to Almighty God for the blessing of his word, without seeming in this act of holy worship to raise a protest against the proceedings of her rulers? What then must these proceedings be? Is it not strange to find all the ministerial papers thus forced by the position which their patrons have assumed, to object to a celebration in which we might have expected every Protestant heartily to join? When we say that this solemn commemoration of the charter of our religious liberties, will have a political effect, we do so because there are few things which can act upon the mass of the people without exerting an influence upon them as members of the state. It will produce political consequences, Just as any thing that can raise the tone of national moralityjust as every thing that can quicken the attachment of the people to their religion--just as every thing that by making Englishmen more devoted to their country, and to the blessings they enjoy-makes them better subjects; in this sense, but in no other, do we look to the approaching celebration as calculated to produce important political results.

What would be said of a party who would have opposed the celebration of the jubilee which was held on King George the Third reaching the fiftieth year of his reign-and opposed it on account of its political effect? Would it not have been at once inferred that the designs of that party were such as would be thwarted by the spirit of loyalty which that solemnity might call forth? And what shall we think of the designs of those who now say that they dread the political effects of a commemoration only calcu

lated to call forth a spirit of attachment to the Bible?

It may be instructive to watch the course which the journals that advocate ministers are forced to take upon many questions that seem far more of a religious than a political nature. Here we see them compelled to oppose the observance of an æra, that should be dear to every Protestant of every political bias. There is another matter in which they have been forced to become the apologists of popery, and that too on a subject in which we might have expected every lover of truth to join in the exposure of its iniquities. Why are the ministerial papers forced to become the advocates of Dens? Why are they compelled to take up all the bungling defences of Dr. Murray, and to employ all their ingenuity to evade the charges against popery? Surely there is something suspicious in the alliance. It is at least strange to see Protestant journalists labouring with all the earnestness of an interested advocacy to defend the character of popery.

We rejoice to perceive that the iniquities of Dens are not permitted to slumber in the oblivion to which some persons would fain consign them. Messrs. O'Sullivan and M'Ghee have been holding meetings in various parts of England and Scotland, and exhi biting to astonished multitudes of British Protestants the proofs of the real character of that church which is now ascendant here. This is well. Let the politicians of expediency say what they will, it is the Protestantism of the country that must save the country-and all the mischief that has been done, has been because statesmen have wanted courage to appeal to that Protestantism. It is not, however, yet too late; the spirit of Protestant England, ay, and of Protestant Scotland, may yet be roused, and the descendants of those who gloriously established their religious liberties at the revolution of 1688, may yet gloriously prove that they have not ceased to value the pri vileges which their fathers purchased with their blood. But we repeat, IT IS THE PROTESTANTISM OF THE COUNTRY THAT MUST SAVE THE COUNTRY.

DEATH OF DR. BRINKLEY.

IT is with feelings of the deepest and most unaffected sorrow that we feel ourselves called to the painful task of recording in our page the death of the Right Rev. Dr. Brinkley, Lord Bishop of Cloyne. This melancholy event took place on Monday, the 14th September, at the house of John Litton, Esq. in this city. His Lordship had been for some time in a declining state of health. For the last few days he was perfectly conscious of his approaching end. He died in the full possession of his faculties, and with that calm serenity of mind which belongs only to the Christian's death-bed.

His Lordship's remains have been deposited with those of the Bishop of Ferns, in the cemetery of the University, with which, for five and thirty years, he had been connected as professor of astronomy. The usual ceremonies of an academic funeral were observed. A deputation from the Royal Irish Academy, of which his Lordship was president, attended his remains to the grave, bearing the mace of the corporation enveloped in crape. It is not, however, by any outward signs of mourning that an adequate expression can be given to the grief for this great man-grief that will be felt most acutely by those who knew him best. Never was there a man so singularly gifted with the power of attaching to himself all who came within the sphere of his influence. It was almost impossible to be in his society without loving him. Uniting with an intellect, the greatness of which is unquestioned, the most engaging gentleness of demeanor and the most perfect simplicity of mind, it was, perhaps, in the privacy of domestic life that he appeared to most advantage. His name, it is true, is identified with the most splendid discoveries of modern science; and the universal assent of the scientific world had accorded to him the reputation of the first mathematical genius of his age. But his memory will be more fondly cherished by those who remember the amiable traits of his more private character, and who, in the ordinary intercourse of life, have seen him not only as the great, but the good man-not more distinguished by the faculties of his intellect than by the more endearing qualities of the heart.

His Lordship was educated at Cambridge: he graduated there as senior wrangler, and was elected a Fellow of Caius College. In 1792 he was invited by the board of Trinity College to accept of the situation of Astronomer Royal of Ireland. This he continued to hold until the year 1826, when he was consecrated Bishop of Cloyne. He had previously been appointed, by Bishop Porter, to the living of Clontibbret; a preferment with which was associated the archdeaconry of Clogher.

It might, perhaps, have been sufficient simply to record upon this page the death of this great man. If we have ventured to add anything to the simple announcement of his decease, it is that we might find a melancholy pleasure in giving expression to our own feelings upon the occasion. We know not whether in his Lordship's death the cause of science or of religion has sustained the greater loss; we know not whether the public should most deplore the death of the first philosopher of the age, or lament the removal of a truly Christian bishop from the flock over whose spiritual concerns he presided with tenderness and care. Those, however, who have known his Lordship in private, will know well the character in which they will feel his loss. They will lament the kind and affectionate friend-the ready and prudent counsellor-the unassuming and pleasing associate-the man of mild and conciliatory manners, who, with capabilities of communicating instruction to any one, seemed ready to receive information from all. It is, after all, the virtues of social-the charities of domestic life, that lend the chief beauty to all human excellence. It is for the qualities that adorn private life that the memory of Dr. Brinkley will be most fondly cherished; and while the literature and the science of his country will mourn the loss of the eminent philosopher and scholar, there are many who will more deeply lament the sincere Christian, and the man of unaffected goodness of heart, We have made no allusion to his Lordship's works; we do not intend these few sentences as a sketch of his life; we simply desire to pay the last poor tribute of affectionate respect to the memory of departed worth.

His Lordship died in the 69th year of his age.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »