We had written extensive notes upon the late extraordinary perturbations in her Majesty's cabinet; but reconsidering how little is as yet known to the public of their origin and history ;-whether for instance a difference of opinion upon the corn-laws was the only cause of division; to what extent that difference existed; what were Sir Robert Peel's plans, whether embracing a total or partial repeal, and with, or without, Some equivalent to the landed interest; the point at which those plans separated him from the Wellington portion of his colleagues; what were the exact difficulties with which Lord John Russell had to cope; how far Lord Grey's repugnance to Lord Palmerston impeded the negociation, and what embarrassments were found in other quarters; but most especially, upon what terms Sir R. Peel has returned to power, and what measures are now determined upon; and with what probability of success ;-considering that these questions are involved in official secrecy; but that the forthcoming meeting of Parliament will speedily cast light upon them, it is premature to offer any speculations upon them. Our province, as Christian Observers, is to deal with facts, with a view to practical edification; and not to launch into the troubled sea of political controversy. Sir R. Peel's administration has been conducted, for the most part, with great ability and success; war has been avoided with skill, national honour, and good faith; the peace of the East has been established; the drooping finances have been restored; many excellent commercial, and some useful ecclesiastical, measures have been carried

But

into effect; and the country has enjoyed a large measure of tranquillity and prosperity. We could not have hoped for so much good statesmanship from the extreme right or left. we must repeat what we said upon Sir R. Peel's return to power in 1841 (see p. 512, 570, 637, &c.) and on other occasions, that he is the very personification of the slippery doctrine of secular expediency; and that he cannot be depended upon where any matter of principle is at stake; and especially that his policy respecting Maynooth, and his uniform refusal to take up any great question as a point of religion and duty abstracted from (supposed) secular policy, would prevent our placing faith in him, even as a party-man, and much less as a man who desired to set the Lord always before him, and to study the spiritual-welfare of the nation. The Maynooth endowment did not take us by surprise; except as to the shortsightedness of his views in that matter as a secular statesman, who was injuring the national and religious institutions which he professed to defend, without even any political equivalent.

If statesmen would but study, and follow out, as servants of Jesus Christ, the holy precepts of God's word, how would their steps be guided in the path of righteousness, peace, and national prosperity, amidst all the tortuous windings of secular politicalism.

We regret to see that rash and vain man, Lord Ellenborough, made First Lord of the Admiralty. The ap

pointment of Mr. Gladstone as Secretary for the Colonies we regard with mingled hope and anxiety; hope, seeing how strongly and conscientiously he is

pledged to promote Christian institutions in the Colonies; anxiety, deep anxiety, lest he should use his patronage and influence to uphold Tractarianism. The Bishop of Calcutta has faithfully exhibited the baleful influence of this unscriptural aud anti-Anglican system in India; and there is a strong predilection for it among several of the colonial dignitaries, and many of the younger colonial clergy; and Mr. Gladstone's official weight thrown into the same scale would produce incalculable mischief. But he has had warning from the late perversions to Popery, and the strongly-exhibited indications of public opinion; and he will do well to take special heed how he fills up the ecclesiastical appointments in our foreign dependencies. We are unwilling at present to say more. In New Zealand he will have, at his first entrance upon office, a difficult task to encounter; more especially if it be true that one reason of Lord Stanley's retiring from office, was his disgust at being overborne in the cabinet on account of the just and humane policy, as regards the Aborogines, which he had upheld in those islands. Let him not forget the declaration of the advocates of the Colonization Society, that their system, and that of the Christian Missionaries, cannot exist together; and this is true, for no man can serve God and Mammon; and let him upon this, as upon all other questions, exhibit his determination to prefer Christian duty to political influence. We must also add, as he is a zealous and influential officer of the Episcopal College now erecting at Perth, the founders of which propose to educate clergymen, not for Scotland only, but the Colonies, that upon his vote and influence in that institution may materially depend the issue whether or not the Scottish Romanistic " Altar-service" shall be adopted in its statutes, or whether it shall follow the Anglican rite. The scales are at present poised; the Bishop of Aberdeen and his party are zealous for the Scottish Laudean or rather Gadderar-office; and if they prevail, then all the grants and donations from England will have been most grievously and unjustly misapplied. The admission or rejection of the Gadderar book is the first test by which sound members of the Church of England will try the College; and Mr. Gladstone ought to notify that upon the decision in this matter will very much depend his patronage of the institution. both in his public and private capacity.

We cannot think these remarks farfetched, considering the persevering efforts made to introduce Tractarianism

into the Colonies, and the prominent part which Mr. Gladstone has taken in promoting Tractarian influence, more especially in the struggles at Oxford, as in the case of Mr. Williams, Dr. Pusey, Mr. Newman, and Mr. Ward. But we would trust that what has occurred will render him cautious as to his official proceedings, whatever may be his private opinions. Did he hear the playful but cutting sarcasm the other day of the Vice-Chancellor of England, upon application being made to him respecting a ward in Chancery, who wished to matriculate at Oxford with a view to become a clergyman of the Church of England, that it was doubtful whether matriculation at Oxford was likely to conduce to that issue? Does he know that Dr. Wiseman, and his colleagues, boast that two hundred Anglican clergymen are about to go over to the Church of Rome, and are only waiting till they can take with them from their respective flocks a goodly company of men and women of wealth and influence? Does he know the extensive jealousy and alarm felt by the great mass of sound-minded clergymen and laymen of the Church of England, in reference to the college at Perth, and the kindred institution set on foot by his Young England friends at Canterbury; and the serious anxieties of several of the rulers of our Church, who till lately regarded Tractarianism, when not obnoxiously rampant, with a lenity which was construed into favour; who surrounded themselves with Tractarian officers, and gave their patronage to Tractarian clergymen; but who now find that it is becoming too strong for them in our training-schools, colleges, and other church institutions ? Gladstone, as presiding over her Majesty's Colonies, must not be the Gladstone of Oxford and of the Board of Trade-especially in the now developed and publicly execrated state of Tractarianism-if he wishes to preserve the public peace, and really to sustain the influence of the Church of England at home and abroad.

Mr.

And here, having mentioned Tractarianism, we may recur to a topic touched upon in our Appendix last month; we mean the unscriptural fancy of praying for the dead, which the Tractarian party are striving to revive. We wonder that superstitious monumental inscriptions to this effect have not been extensively introduced; for Sir Herbert Jenner (now Fust) pronounced in the Carisbrooke tomb-stone case, that the practice is not forbidden by our Church. While the law is supposed to stand thus, a clergyman can

not upon any legal ground refuse to admit, nor can a Bishop command to be removed, a tablet requesting the prayers of the faithful for a departed person. Dr. Pusey's inscription at St. Saviour's, Leeds, has led us to recur to the subject; and we cannot but think that efforts should be made to procure a reversal of Sir Herbert's decision (we do not mean in the by-gone Carisbrooke case, but when a suitable opportunity occurs) either in his own court, or by an appeal. It was a very young judgment; it was pronounced when the Tracts for the Times were at their height, and were extensively supposed to bear the stamp of orthodox authority; the case was lamely argued on the true Anglican side, and with great effect on the other; and the question turned, in Sir Herbert's mind, upon a very nice and, we must say, unfounded distinction. The case, our readers will remember, was decided in December, 1838. The inscription objected to was, "Pray for the soul of J. Woolfrey.' Sir Herbert said that the twenty-second Article forbad prayer for the dead only in connexion with Purgatory. He would not argue the theological bearings of the question. Purgatory was without warranty of Scripture; but it did not follow that prayer for the dead was so. Prayer for the dead was older than Purgatory. It was not forbidden to pray that the faithful dead might have quiet and rest in the interval between death and judgment; and at last have their perfect consummation and bliss. He made the argument to turn between praying them out of pain; and praying for an increase of their felicity;-an absurd distinction. Prayer for the dead was discouraged, as likely to lead to superstition; but not forbidden as being wrong in itself. This, he said, was the purport of the Homily. If the Church had intended to forbid the practice, it would have done so directly; a statement opposed to his own arguments in the Altar case. We think that a good brief would overturn this most feeble reasoning, either in his own court, or by appeal. The judgment of the Master of the Rolls, in a case bearing upon the subject shortly after, seemed to us to contravene this decision. It was the case of the Attorney-General (at the suit of J. H. Thelwall) against the Fishmonger's Company, respecting some property left for establishing a foundation for praying for the souls of the donors. Lord Langdale said that he gave no opinion upon the point ruled by Sir H. Jenner, whether praying for the dead is forbidden by our Church; but to create an establishment in perpetuity

for that purpose is a superstitious use; and the property could not be legally devoted to that object. He preserved the etiquette of not contradicting an ecclesiastical Judge upon a point of ecclesiastical law; but he would not allow his decision to proceed to action.

In referring last month to Dr. Pusey's inscription, we could only say that while he lived it is lawful; and that it might be that the Bishop of Ripon had taken measures for its removal at his death. We could then speak only hypothetically; we can now speak positively. So on a former occasion we could only intimate the probability that Bishop Longley would not dedicate the church to " St. Cross;" and it turns out that he did not do so. We will insert a letter upon the subject of St. Saviour's church, and this inscription, which our readers may rely upon as authentic document. Our friend's letter is dated Islington; and signed Septuagenarius; but of course his name is known to us.

"To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

"Will you allow one who has been a subscriber from the first Number of your work in 1801, to call the attention of your readers to a question which the judgment of the Ecclesiastical Court some years since appears to have incidentally decided, but not directly and fully settled upon a clear case adequately and discreetly laid before it; I mean the lawfulness of Prayer for the dead, in our Protestant Church. I cannot help thinking that the illegality, ecclesiastically considered, and on the footing of the authorised documents, and known views of our Reformers may be demonstrated; and that the eminent Judge of the Court of Arches, who has so distinctly condemned the use of Stone Altars, and so admirably determined the positive antiRomanist import of our formularies, might possibly pronounce-if the case came directly before him-a very different sentence from that in the Carisbrooke case of 1838. His decision then went mainly on the ground that the Church of England does not distinctly forbid the practice(I think, however, it does)-except as connected with the superstition of purgatory.

"I am the more anxious for a reconsideration of this important question, from the danger of the Inscription in St. Saviour's new church, at Leeds, becoming an example for other founders of churches, in these semi-popish days, when a kind of madness seems to have possessed so many of our Clergy; or rather when a portion of that "strong delusion" attached by St. Paul to the proceedings of the man of sin" seems to have infatuated their judgment.

"Having fallen on the mention of St. Saviour's, Leeds, allow me to mention some facts in reply to the condemnation passed upon the amiable and excellent Bishop of the diocese, in a letter inserted in a paper professing to hold the doctrines and order of our Church.

66

It happens to me to know that the Bishop was most decided and peremptory in ordering the removal of everything of a really doubtful or unsuitable nature appertaining to the Church, before his Lordship would consent to consecrate it. The name was altered from "Holy Cross," to "St. Saviour's." Three times the Bishop visited it in person during the progress of the works, and stopped everything which seemed to approach to a non-Protestant character. A correspondence of seventy letters or more passed, in which the Bishop was decided, most decided, in his conduct. His Lordship conceived, however, that after the Founder had expended so immense a sum in erecting a beautiful and most commodious church for the heathen parts of the population of Leeds, he should not have been justified in refusing him the pulpit on the evening of the day of consecration. Such a refusal would have seemed to condemn a Clergyman of another diocese, over whom he had no jurisdiction, after the suspension of two years had expired and he was preaching as usual before the University in his ordinary turns. The strongest language, however, was employed in granting Dr. Pusey the pulpit to prohibit the introduction of any topics bordering on doctrines of which he knew the Bishop strenuously disapproved.

"The permission also to have the prayer for the sinner who had built the church placed over the Western door was accompanied with two provisos, the one that the inscription should not be on any constituent part of the walls of the church itself; but on a separate

was

We record with much sorrow the decease of Dr. Alexander, the first Bishop of the Anglican Church in Jerusalem. The affecting circumstances, as well as the general narrative of his life, having been widely circulated, are doubtless known to all our readers. He exhibited uniformly the character which we affixed to him in our allusions to his conversion (1825, p. 513,) of being "An Israelite indeed," in the Christian sense. His life was devout, holy, and exemplary; his manners were gentle and amiable; he deeply-read in Hebrew and Talmudical literature; and was a well-exercised Christian student; and intense was his love to his Saviour, who had redeemed him by his blood, and called him out of darkness and bondage into the light and liberty of the Gospel. He has laid the foundation of the Jerusalem bishoprick with more perhaps of permanent strength, than if he had evinced greater energy and less love; and amidst many difficulties he saw the work of the Lord steadily advancing.

A. R.;