Parliamentary Candidates.

In reply to inquiries connected with a General Election, the Author of the Black Book begs publicly to announce that he is ready to offer himself (free of expense) a Candidate for the representation of any City or Borough in Parliament, in opposition to a Tory or Conservative Whig; but he will not, when union is so essential, divide the reform interest,—that is, he will not weaken the popular cause by being brought forward as a third man, in any case, where it may endanger the return of a brother Radical, or even a Liberal Reformer. By a Liberal Reformer is meant a Reformer who has generally supported the late Ministers, and who is in favour of the Ballot, Short Parliaments, Household Suffrage, and a thorough reform of the Church and Corporations.

CHEAP WEEKLY POLITICAL PUBLICATION.

On Saturday, in the first Week of the meeting of Parliament, No. 1. of a Weekly Review and Register of Politics, Literature, and Statistics,

entitled

THE GOOD SENSE.

By the Author of “The Black Book,” “The History of the Middle and Working Classes,” &c.

The design of this new periodical work is not only to furnish a cheap weekly Review and Register of Politics, Literature, and Statistical Information, but to establish those principles of political and social amelioration which the Editor has inculcated in his former publications.

marchant, printer, ingram-court, fenchurch-street.

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. i. p. 46.

Supplement to the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Scotsman Newspaper, May 14, 1831.

Foreign Quarterly Review, No. X. p. 394.

Belsham’s History of Great Britain, vol. x. page 349.

Morning Chronicle, October 24, 1831.

Commentaries, b. ii. ch. 3.

Quarterly Review, No. 83.

Commentaries, b. i. chap. 11.

Constitutional History of England, vol. i. p. 77.

House of Commons, April 27th, 1830.

31 Eliz. c. 6; 12 Ann, stat. 2, c. 12; also, the cases of Bishop of London v. Ffytche, and of Fletcher v. Lord Sondes.

All the offices of the Church being professedly of a spiritual nature, and executed for spiritual objects, an American bishop, Dr. Hobart, during his sojourn in this country, felt much scandalized by reading the following details of secular traffic in the Morning Chronicle, July 13, 1824:—

“The church livings in Essex, sold on the 1st instant, by Mr. Robins, of Regent-street, were not the absolute advowsons, but the next presentations contingent on the lives of Mr. and Mrs. W. T. P. L. Wellesley, aged thirty-six and twenty-five years respectively, and were as under:—

The biddings appeared to be governed by the age and health of the incumbents, residence, situation, and other local circumstances, with which the parties interested seemed to be well acquainted.”

For the sense in which the term living has been used in the preceding classification, see the Explanations prefixed to the List of Pluralists at the end of this article.

Statutes 21 Henry VIII. c. 13, and 57 Geo. III. c. 99.

The Church and Nothing but the Church, p. 12.

Bentham’s Church of Englandism, p. 250, where this curious epistle is inserted at length.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 471, Sess. 1830.

57 Geo. III. c. 99, the act which now regulates the residence of the clergy.

House of Lords, May, 4, 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 471, Sess. 1830. After what has been explained, it is perhaps unnecessary to observe that there are not actually so many individuals as the number of resident and non-resident incumbents in the Returns import. The apparent inconsistency results from pluralities. Every benefice with cure has an incumbent; but, as each incumbent often holds two or more benefices, it reduces the number of individuals to the amount we have stated, (page 30,) namely, 7191.

Third Report of the Charity Commissioners, p. 230.

Nos. 248 and 250, for 1814 and 1815.

Charge to the Clergy of the County of Salop.

House of Commons, April 27, 1830.

Evidence of Dr. Goodall, Third Report of Education-Committee.

It is to this hour the practice at one of the Universities, in obedience to the statutes of Laud, to demand of every student on his matriculation, provided he have attained the mature age of twelve years, his written assent and consent to all and every of the thirty-nine Articles of religion!—and at the other, where candidates for the degree of Master of Arts are, for the first time, required to subscribe, I can solemly declare,—from my own positive, personal, knowledge,—that the most reckless levity—the most dangerous trifling with the sacred engagements of truth, are found to prevail on these occasions! I ask are such the approved methods of laying the foundation of a national morality? I ask are these mockeries an exemplification of the position so recently proclaimed by Captain Basil Hall,—that ‘it is the aristocratical classes, and they alone, who can give a right tone to manners, by setting the fashion in everything which is true in principle, or practically wise in morals and in politics?’—The Church: its Civil Establishment indefensible.—Hunter, London, 1831.

Trial of Peter Watson, in the Consistory Court of Durham, for the substraction of Easter Offerings.

Eleventh Annual Report of the Commissioners, Session, 1831.

Church-Building-Acts the 58 Geo. III. c. 45; 59 Geo. III. c. 134; 3 Geo. IV. c. 72; 5 Geo. IV. c. 103; 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 72; 9 Geo. IV. c. 42.

The efforts to promote Church of Englandism by expensive establishments are attended with as little success in the Colonies as in the mother country. In Upper Canada, out of 235 clergymen, only 33 are clergymen of the church of England. The Moravians are the sect whose mission is most successful in the West Indies. They mix familiarly with the Indians, instruct them in the arts of agriculture and building, and thus hold out to them advantages more readily comprehended than the mysteries of the Trinity, election, and the incarnation.

The poverty of the Welch clergy is proverbial; many of the curates receive no more than £10 or £15 per annum. They seldom taste animal food, a meagre allowance of bread and potatoes being all their scanty means afford. In North Wales we have heard (Church Regeneration and University Reform) there is a clergyman of the establishment who receives no more than the miserable stipend mentioned. He has a wife and six children. In the day-time he contrives to scrape together a few pence by conducting a boat in which passengers cross a river: he is the barber of the village, shaves for a penny every Saturday night; and five evenings in the week he teaches the children of the poor villagers reading and writing, for which he receives a small acknowledgement. O, ye ecclesiastical potentates, ye Blomfields and Sumners, for one moment lay aside your silken attributes, stop your postillions at the foot of Snowdon, and visit a poor afflicted brother!

In Liverpool, Mr. Morgan Jones affirms, within these last five years there have been discovered among the prostitutes of that dissolute sea-port no less than twenty-five young women the daughters of Welch clergymen.

Quarterly Review, vol. xxix. p. 554.

Essay on the Revenues of the Church, p. 124.

Archdeacon Plymley’s Charge to the Clergy of the County of Salop.

Parl. papers, vol. xi. No. 303, Session 1820.

Parl. Papers, vol. xii. No. 474, Session 1815.

The Diocesan Returns, laid before the privy council, for 1827, state that, of the non-resident incumbents, 1590 do duty; but the amount of duty they discharge is not stated. Many incumbents who reside do no duty. Allowing for the non-residents who do duty, and the residents who do none, we believe the number of incumbents, who actually perform the duties of parishes, is not greater than we have mentioned.

Hallam’s Constitutional History of England, p. 78.

Paley’s Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, book vi. chap. 10.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 115, Session 1815.

Edinburgh Review, No. 75.

Parliamentary Papers, vol. viii. Sess. 1819.

The incumbents in London are usually careful to select curates whose abilities are not likely to eclipse their own. Some do not stop here, but actually make personal appearance an object of consideration, always taking care to choose a curate of a less imposing figure than themselves. Hence many parishes, in order to have a tolerable discourse once on Sunday, and a decent-looking man for a preacher, go to the expense of paying an evening lecturer of their own choice; but here again they are often foiled by the reverend rector, or reverend vicar, refusing to let him preach in his pulpit. A Reverend Mr. Gunn, a man well remembered by many in London, was once placed in this predicament: he mentioned the circumstance to a former Bishop of London; on which his Lordship replied, alluding to the rector in question, “Ah, Mr. Gunn, you can shoot too well for him.” The lecturers are paid by voluntary subscription; the lecturer going round with his subscription-book among the butchers, bakers, and publicans, humbly requesting “Mr. Pumpkin or Mr. Samuel Blewett to put down his name for any trifle he pleases.”

Much of the spiritual duty in the metropolis is performed by job-parsons. These are unfortunate men, who, being without powerful influence or connexion, are unprovided with a regular curacy or benefice; or, perhaps, some of them have been cast on the world from an unlucky adventure at college, an ungovernable propensity to strong cordials, or an untoward issue of a love-affair in their native parishes. Whatever is the cause, they are met with in great number in different parts of the town, and may be generally known from their care-worn appearance, soiled linen, and threadbare clothes. Like coopers, carpenters, and other branches of operatives, they have their houses of call, where they inform themselves of the state of ecclesiastical employment and the current rate of remuneration. It is to these places the well-fed pastors of London resort, when, from indisposition—that is the usual pretext—or some unforeseen emergency, they require a deputy, or assistant, to pass through the morning-service. In this resource they are never disappointed, for, unfortunately, the market is overstocked with labourers in the vineyard, and the unattached sons of the church may be always met with in readiness, like so many ticket-porters, for any half-crown or dollar engagement.

From these traits may be learned the manner in which the churches are served, and the degraded state of discipline in the metropolis, where the revenues are more than ten times sufficient, if properly distributed, to pay for the permanent services of men of first-rate talents, independence, and character.

Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, vol. xxxvii. p. 551.

Cobbett’s Register, October 29, 1831.

Acts and Mon. vol. ii. p. 1189; quoted by De Laune.

Calderwood, Hist. Ch. of Scot. p. 256; quoted by De Laune.

London, E. Wilson, 1831.

History of James II.

Dr. Southey’s Life of Wesley, vol. i. p. 371.

Votes of the House of Commons, June 19, 1829.

Church Establishment founded in Error, p.86. This estimate, we apprehend, has been founded on erroneous data. In many parishes there is no church at all, though the tithe in these parishes is collected with as much rigour as in the rest. In the fine county of Kent there are thirteen parishes which have no churches, and forty-four parishes, each having less than 100 inhabitants, none of whom hardly ever see the face of a parson, and yet who have tithes exacted from them to the last blade of grass. It is obligatory both on bishops and incumbents that parsonage houses should not fall into decay, yet it is a fact that there are 3000 churches and parochial chapels to which neither house nor glebe is attached. With the immense revenues of the established church it must be sickening and disgusting to her best friends, to think how her interests have been neglected by those who have been wallowing in her wealth.

Catholic Laity’s Directory.

St. James’s Chronicle, of Nov. 20 to 23, 1830, contains the following articles of “Property for Sale,” advertised and specified in numbers from 1 to 79:—

Compare this with the Oath on Simony.

Trial of John Ambrose Williams, for a libel on the Clergy of Durham, Aug. 16th, 1822, p. 43. The defendant had given umbrage to the haughty clergy of the Palatinate by commenting, in a newspaper, on their servile conduct in prohibiting the bells to be tolled on the occasion of the death of the Queen of George IV.

Quarterly Review, vol. xxix. p. 556.

Third Report of the Education Committee, Sess. 1818, p. 72.

Third Report of Education Committee, p. 71, evidence of the Rev. Dr. Goodall.

Account of Public Charities, abridged from the Commissioners’ Reports, with Notes and Comments, by the Editor of the “Cabinet Lawyer,” p.15.

While the Catholic religion maintains its influence over the popular mind, we esteem it quite impossible for any government permanently to maintain its authority without conciliating the priesthood. Lord Grey ought to make a provision for the Catholic clergy out of the tithes; or send over to Dublin his grace of Norfolk, or other popish viceroy, who believes with O’Connell in the real presence. The Irish proprietary, too, have evinced a singular want of political philosophy. The late lord Liverpool stated that nineteen-twentieths of the property of Ireland belonged to protestants; but how can they expect to enjoy their possessions in peace if they continue to differ from their peasantry in points of faith. A gentleman ought to be superior to the prejudices of sects whether Catholic or Protestant; in such matters it is best to follow the multitude, or those who cultivate his domains. Voltaire built a church for his neighbours at Ferney, and occasionally preached there.

Parliamentary Papers, vol. xxi. Session 1824.

Parliamentary Papers, vol. ix. page 75, Session 1825.

Parliamentary Debates, vol. viii. p. 837.

Wakefield’s Statistical Account of Ireland, p. 469.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 328, Sess. 1831.

The Composition-Act, 4 Geo. IV. c. 99, s. 43.

Ecclesiastical Register of Ireland for 1830, p. 33.

This work is by John C. Erck, A. M., LL.B. and published in Dublin. It is an elaborate and well-compiled performance, abounding in much curious and useful information, of great interest to those enjoying and aspiring to ecclesiastical emoluments; but, having been edited under the sanction of the Board of First Fruits, the Editor has been careful not to afford the slightest glimpse of the discipline and immense amount and mal-administration of the revenues of the Irish church.

Ecclesiastical Register of Ireland, p. 24.

Lord Mountcashel, in his speech on Church Reform, May 4, 1830, relates a curious anecdote, illustrative of the luscious keenness of the English clergy after tithes. His lordship had been recently in company with a clergyman, while looking after his tenths: and when the man in orders met a goose with its goslings, he stopped to count the progeny, and would cry, “Ah! there’s one for me.” Or, if he overtook a sow with her litter, he summed them up, with the observation, “Ah! there are two for me.” The noble lords were highly diverted with this example of ecclesiastical cupidity: they laughed heartily, and our readers may laugh too—if they like.

Parliamentary Papers, vol. ix. p.83, Session, 1825.

Ibid, p. 308.

Catholic Relief Act, 10 Geo. IV. c. 7, ss. 29-36.

Parliamentary Report, No. 337, session 1831.

Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons, May 18, 1830.

Mr. Spring Rice, House of Commons, May 18, Session 1830.

Parl. Paper, No. 185, Session 1831.

Mr. Leader estimated the sum annually drawn out of Ireland in tithes and the rents of glebe and bishops’ lands at £1,785,000. (House of Commons, December 11th, 1831.) Our previous statements from official returns will have satisfied our readers that this is not an exaggerated estimate.

Statement made at the Aggregate Meeting, Dublin, August 2nd, 1831.

Lord Melbourne’s Diary, p. 376.

House of Commons, March 30, 1830.

Parliamentary paper, 271, Sess. 1831.

The palace jobs have yielded splendid pickings to the upholsterers. Messrs. Morel and Seddon’s estimates for furnishing Windsor Castle amounted to £143,000, which were paid to them; but the bills they delivered were for £203,963, leaving a balance of £60,963. A parliamentary committee demurred to the payment of so large a balance over the estimates. Certain persons, deemed competent judges, were appointed to examine the charges for selected articles of furniture which the committee thought would be a criterion whereby to judge whether the general charges of the bills were extravagant. But the gentlemen nominated by the Treasury to appraise, after a preliminary inspection, declined the task, the furniture being of that peculiar sort, they were incapable of forming an estimate of its value. Messrs. Morel and Seddon next delivered a statement of the sums actually expended by them in materials, labour, and trade charges, and the profit accruing, which statement was verified by an inspection of their books by Mr. Abbott, an accountant. Witnesses were then examined as to the fair profit which ought to be charged by upholsterers, and the result was the bill of Morel and Seddon, originally £203,963 : 6 : 5, was reduced to £179,300 : 13 : 9.

Parl. Paper, No. 343, vol. iii. Session 1829.

Lord Brougham, Parliamentary Debates, vol. xxi. 245.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 561, Session 1830.

Treasury Minute, dated 15th April, 1828.

Mr. Angelo Taylor, House of Commons, June 23, 1828.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 1, Session 1820.

Hansard’s Parl. Debates, vol. 34, p. 272.

Treasury Minute, Parl. Paper, vol. 1, Session 1820.

Works of Burke, vol. iii. pp. 277-8.—Speech on Economical Reform.

Parl. Report on the Civil List, Session 1815.—Ordered to be reprinted July 6, 1830.

Ibid. p. 5.

Parl. Report, No. 27, Sess. 1831.

Annual Finance Accounts, Session 1830, p. 134.

Anecdotes of the Life of Bishop Watson, p. 194. This work, with the Memoirs of Sir N. Wraxall, and the admirable Recollections of the Reign of George III. by Mr. Nicholls, comprise valuable materials for forming a true estimate of the public men and measures that distinguished the last century. They have, we believe, been either unnoticed or greatly misrepresented by the reviewers; but this is a point of no great consequence, since Truth is in her nature buoyant and insinuating, and must ultimately triumph over every disadvantage. The monopoly of the press, like every other monopoly opposed to the general welfare, is fast tending to a consummation. The Memoirs of Lord Waldegrave is another useful publication for illustrating the factious nature of the government from the Revolution, and the entire want of public principle in the men who directed it. It is impossible to help commisserating the situation of George the Second, surrounded by venal statesmen, not one of whom would render him the least service without first bargaining for a batch of places and pensions for his relatives and dependents. Even Chatham, with whose name it had been usual to associate better things, appears, from the noble author, to have been no better than his compeers, and ready at any time to sacrifice his public duty to his selfishness and ambition. These repeated disclosures must, at length, convince the most incredulous; and all classes allow that the government, for the last century and a half, has been the prey of mercenary adventurers, whose sole objects were to plunder the people and tyrannize over the monarch.

Blackstone’s Comment. b. iv. ch. iv. and v. and Smith’s Wealth of Nations, b. iii. ch. iv. where the nature of the ancient tenures is investigated.

Humphreys on the Laws of Real Property, 2d edit. p. 31.

We suppose all our readers have read Colonel Thompson’s Catechism of the Corn Laws, price six-pence. His True Theory of Rent, price three-pence, is another admirable publication. The public is indebted to this gentleman for having placed the science of Political Economy on its legs again: it now stands much where it did when Adam Smith left it, after a perilous escape through the thick cloud of darkness in which it had been enveloped by the misleading subtleties of Mr. Ricardo and his followers.

Lowe’s Present State of England, p. 318.

5 Ann, c. 14, and decisions thereon; Loft, 178; 15 East Reports, 462.

In England and Wales in 1830, the number of convictions for criminal offences was 12,805. The number of convictions under the Game Laws was 1987, being nearly one-sixth of the total number of offenders of every description.

Lowe’s Present State of England, App. p. 65.

Edinburgh Review, No. 162, p. 316.

Letter to the Duke of Wellington on creating Peers for Life.

Letter to Earl Grey on the Adjustment of the House of Peers.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 532, Session 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 141, Session 1831.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 280, Session 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 626, Session 1830.

Mr. Hume, House of Commons, February 19, 1827.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 149, Session 1827.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 487, Session 1828.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 240, Session 1831.

Treatise on the Police and Crimes of the Metropolis, by the Editor of the Cabinet Lawyer, where the tendency of the debtor-laws is more fully investigated.

Report on Small Debts, Parliamentary Paper, vol. iv. Session 1823.

Lord Brougham, House of Commons, Feb. 7, 1828, printed speech, p. 45.

This arrest, the end of which, it is to be hoped, fast approaches, was not generally given by the common law. The capias ad respondendum is given in Debt and Detinue, by West, 2 (13 Ed. I.) cap. 11, in case only so late as 19 Hen. VII. c. 9.

Edinburgh Review, No. 101, p. 129.

Lord Stowell’s judgment, in Dalrymple v. Dalrymple.

Lord Brougham, House of Commons, April 29, 1830.

Better late than never—In the Session of 1830, an additional judge was added to each of the three superior courts of King’s Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, but the augmentation, we apprehend, is not commensurate to the wants of the community.

House of Commons, Delays in Chancery, Feb. 24, 1824.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 282, Session 1830.

The power of the lord chancellor to adjudicate in bankruptcy was granted by a statute of Henry VIII. but it was never exercised till the time of Lord Chancellor Nottingham.

The number of bankrupties has declined of late years. It may be partly ascribed to the less commercial speculation and adventure, and partly to the enormous expense attending bankrupt proceedings. If the decline in bankruptcies continue, the Court of Bankruptcy will become little better than a sinecure establishment. But, perhaps, the greater cheapness and dispatch of the new tribunal may augment the number of bankruptcies, by abstracting from the business of the Insolvent Court, and lessening compromises between creditors and debtors, which have been frequently resorted to, to avoid an expensive procedure.

House of Commons, Dec. 9, 1831.

Sir Henry Parnell on Financial Reform, p. 49.

Law Magazine for January, 1830.

Treatise on the Police and Crimes of the Metropolis, p. 129. By the Editor of the Cabinet Lawyer.

The amount of revenue, and the estimate of the naval and military expenses, from the Revolution to the end of the reign of George II. are taken from Dr. Colquhoun’s Treatise on the Resources of the British Empire.

Viscount Goderich, House of Lords, May 5, 1830.

Fourth Report of Select Committee on Public Income and Expenditure, p. 20.

Parliamentary Report, No. 522, Session 1825. From Mr. Pratt’s Tables for 1831 it appears there are 4,117 Friendly Societies in England, and probably the number of members, since 1815, has augmented to 1,500,000, with a corresponding increase of funds. It is gratifying to observe the progress of Friendly Societies and Savings’ Banks in both Great Britain and Ireland. Their success must be satisfactory to those who consider the working people deficient in prudence and foresight. The truth is, they only require to be made acquainted with their real interests, and then, like the more educated, they would doubtless pursue them.

Principles of Political Economy, 2nd Edit. p. 493.

Sir H. Parnell on Financial Reform, p. 141.

Sir Henry Parnell on Financial Reform, p. 234.

Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, New Series, vol. ix. p. 1107.

C. P. Thomson, House of Commons, March 26, 1830.

After taking possession of the palace of the Begums—the mother and grandmother of our ally, the nabob of Oude—in 1782, two old domestics of the Begums were tortured to elicit an account of the Begums’ treasure. Above £500,000 was paid, but the ill treatment continued, with the hope of extracting more money, when, it being found unavailing, they were set at liberty.

Works of Edmund Burke, vol. iv. p. 85.

Supplement to the Life of Major-General Sir T. Munro, vol. iii. p. 120.

The commissioners appointed to investigate the debts of this Nabob finished their labours in the course of 1830, having consumed in the inquiry exactly a quarter of a century. One of the principal commissioners died almost immediately after concluding this notable job. The claims set up against the Nabob amounted to £30,404,919; the commissioners allowed £2,686,146.—Parl. Rep. No. 114, Sess. 1830.

Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on India Affairs, Sess. 1830, Nos. 275 to 277.

Considerations relative to the Renewal of the Company’s Charter. By W. S. O’Brien, M.P.

Report of Commons’ Committee, Sess. 1830, Nos. 405, 627, 2078.

Second Petition of the East-Indians, Alexander’s East-India Magazine, January, 1832.

Lord Ellenborough, House of Lords, December 13th, 1831.

It was only during the commercial crisis of 1826 that Lord Liverpool discovered the Bank was empowered to make advances on goods and merchandise; the Directors, it appears, were as little aware of this dormant privilege as his Lordship, having been too much occupied with their more ostentatious and profitable dealings with the Treasury, to attend to the humble avocation set forth by the three balls.

During the continuance of the income-tax, the Bank had an allowance of £1250 per million, or one-eighth per cent. for receiving the produce of that impost. It had also another source of profit from lotteries; for issuing the tickets and paying the prizes it received £1000 for each lottery.

Ricardo on a Secure and Economical Currency, p. 84.

Memorial of Country Bankers, addressed to the Lords of the Treasury, May 9, 1828.—Parliamentary Paper, No. 328, Sess. 1828.

The private bankers in London and in the country have reason to be jealous of the increasing business and importance of the Bank of England. The branch banks must ultimately prove dangerous rivals in the large provincial towns. In the metropolis the number of private accounts that have been opened with the Company since the great commercial crisis of 1825 is immense. Many who continue to keep accounts with the private firms only do so to the extent of what may be termed their circulating cash; the mass of their unemployed capital being deposited in the more secure and unfathomable vaults of Threadneedle-street. By this division of confidence the private banks get only the most troublesome and least profitable part of the banking business.

Blomefield’s History of Norfolk, vol. iii. p. 494.

Madox Firma Burgi, p. 26.

Sir Frederick Eden’s History of the Poor, p. 598.

Evidence in support of the Franchise of Resident Freemen, p. 26.

Newell’s Evidence, &c. p. 10.

Abridgement of the Reports of the Royal Commissioners on Public Charities, by the Editor of the Cabinet Lawyer. This work has been called “national,” and may be had of the publisher of the Black Book. From the valuable notes and comments of the editor we have been indebted for much of our information relative to the present state of corporations.

Account of Liverpool, by Smithers, p. 47.

Aikin’s History of Manchester, p. 345.

Smither’s Account of Liverpool, p. 59.

Aikin’s History of Manchester, p. 607.

Abridgement of the Charity Reports: Notes of the Editor, p. 237.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 552, Session 1828.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 594, Session 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 185, Session 1830.

Ibid, page 5.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 424, Session 1826.

Third Report of the Committee on Public Income and Expenditure, Parliamentary Papers, vol. v. Session 1828.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 55, Session 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 426, Session 1826.

Third Report on the Public Income and Expenditure; Parliamentary Papers, vol. v. Sess. 1828.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 450, Sess. 1830.

Parliamentary Paper, No. 23, Session 1830-1.

Macintosh’s History of England, vol. i. p. 72.

Turner’s History of the Anglo-Saxons, 5th edit. v. iii. p. 91.

Sir Frederick Eden’s History of the Poor, p. 7.

Allen’s short History of the House of Commons, p. 12.

History of England, vol. viii. p. 329.

We have received the account of this institution from a correspondent in Dublin, well known in that city and also to the English Public. With respect to its accuracy, we can only say, that we will promptly correct any error that may be pointed out from an authentic source; but at the same time we warn the College that partial contradictions, unaccompanied by plain statements of income and expenditure, can do no service to that establishment.

Parl. Paper, vol. v. No. 542, Sess. 1832.

The conduct of the Morning Herald, with its twaddling notions on currency, commerce, population, and morals, is not matter of surprise; like a blind man it is always see-sawing from one side to the other to catch subscribers. But the apostacy of The Times has been as abrupt as the dismissal of the Reform Ministry. We are at a loss to account for it, unless it be on the supposition of a ruse on the part of the chief proprietor, who, having sacrificed £30,000 in a former election, may deem it more economical to become mongrel Tory than risk another contest with the conservatives of Berkshire. As to the scribes who minister to such abandonment of public principle, they are only the breath of Mr. Walter’s nostrils, and more objects of pity than any thing else!

asterisks This note first appeared in the third edition of the Appendix; since which Mr. Walter has been returned, without contest, along with two Conservatives, for Berkshire. Whether the changed politics of The Times were the peace-offering we are unable to say, but the Berkshire Tories have obviously been conciliated. Mr. Walter in his address, dated Jan. 14th, acknowledges that his first election was chiefly owing to the ‘middle and industrious classes,’ but that on the ‘present occasion’ he was also indebted to ‘a new and increasing friendship on the part of the clergy, and of the county aristocracy.’

The chief cause of the breaking up of the late Administration is now generally admitted to have been the King’s alarm at the sweeping plan of Church Reform preparing by the Whigs, and which the Quarterly Review called ‘spoliation.’ His Majesty, we fear, like his ‘sainted father,’ (the prenomen is lord Kenyon’s,) has got into the hands of the heads of the Church, and considering his advanced age there is little hope of an escape. The first intimation of yielding to spiritual influence was the King’s reply to the address of the Bishops, of which that pamphleteering and intriguing prelate, Phillpotts, gave so admirable a paraphrase, and circulated it with no small effrontery as the out-pouring of the royal mind. That the cause of the break-up originated in the Court and not in the internal divisions of the Cabinet, we have the explicit testimony of the ex-Premier in his reply to the Reformers of Derby (Dec. 1st), and of Lord John Russell in the speech above referred to.

Law Magazine, No. 12, p. 448.

Lord Brougham has certainly no objection to be laughed at, and not unfrequently goes out of his way to raise a laugh. The bill he threw on the table for the reform of the appellate judicature of the House of Lords on the last day but one of the session could only have been meant as a joke. With the same motive no doubt he introduced at the middle of the session his bills for the prevention of pluralities and the non-residence of the clergy. The delay in bringing forward the appeal bill, his lordship excused, on the pretext of “the extraordinary pressure of business in the Lords,” though it is notorious they sat several months of the early part of the session with no business whatever before them.

How the Chancellor, who professes to take the lead in legal reform, can tolerate, year after year, the present management of appeals, passes comprehension. The farce of appealing from a judge in one place to the same judge in another constitutes only half the absurdity. Two noble lords sit and assist at the first hearing of an appeal; two others sit and hear the other side. On the third day two more noble lords who had not been present before come down and hear the reply. The cause is then set down for judgment, and in the fourth stage two noble lords assist at the judgment who had not been present either at “the beginning, middle, or end of the proceedings.” (Lord Brougham’s own description, Aug. 15th.) One would hardly expect an extravaganza like this to be enacted in the highest court of judicature in the kingdom. Scotch appeals, too, are brought to the Lords; the errors of the Scotch judges are brought to be corrected by a tribunal which is about as well acquainted with the laws of Scotland as the laws of Japan!

It was observed of James II. that he sacrificed “his kingdom for a mass.” The contempt is hardly less which attaches to the conduct of Mr. Stanley and his ex-colleagues. They not only threw away office but the prospect of office; for it is clear no man can long take part in the councils of this country who denies the legislative right to secularize church property—a principle consecrated by the example of every European state. In this the late Secretary of the Colonies committed a mistake, and demonstrated that his powers of debate exceeded his knowledge of the spirit of the age. Indeed, Mr. Stanley has not latterly evinced much wisdom; he was manifestly becoming a spoiled child of the House of Commons, and unable to bear the flattering but intoxicating “cheers,” “laughs,” and “hear hears” of the honourable members. His late speeches were in the worst style of that flashy adventurer, George Canning, whose brazen monument in Palace-yard, erected in honour of successful effrontery, casts ridicule on all posthumous tributes to the truly great.

That landlords usually proportion their rents to the ability of their tenantry may be instanced in the condition of farmers in the northern counties. Here, owing to the more frugal and laborious habits of farmers, land pays a higher rent than in the southern division of the kingdom. The examination of Mr. Blamire, M.P. before the Agricultural Committee is very instructive on these points; he is interrogated on the diet, &c. of farmers in Cumberland and Westmoreland.

“Is not their diet very frugal?—Their diet is extremely simple, consisting, in a great part, of barley bread, potatoes, milk, and a small quantity of bacon.

“And they themselves have been content to work with their own hands?—Yes.

“Does that observation apply to men farming to a considerable extent, and paying a large amount of rent?—Men farming £400, or £500, or £600 a-year, will dine with their servants; and on particular occasions will plough or harrow, or do various operations of husbandry themselves.

“And the landlords, throughout the period of the high prices, have partaken of the benefit of the rents which these frugal habits would enable their tenants to pay?—Yes, they have.

“And the great profit has been to the landlords, inasmuch as the tenant so living and adopting these habits of frugal expenditure, has been enabled to pay a higher rent than he could otherwise have afforded?—Most undoubtedly.

“Do you find, in fact, that in these two counties, where you say that those frugal habits prevail, the rent of the same quality of land is higher than in other counties?—A great deal higher; lands, which in Cumberland let for 40s. an acre, would not, in many other counties in England, let at more than 26s. or 27s.

“Do you ascribe that higher rate of rent very much to the simple lives and frugal habits of the tenants?—To the frugal habits of the farmer and his labour.”—Agricultural Report, sess. 1833, p. 306.

These hints may be useful to landlords in the south; if they can bring their tenants to live as they do in the north, they may squeeze from them much higher rents; and if, by the working of the Poor Law Bill, they can reduce labourers to the Irish level, it is possible they may get them up to the war standard. But the question occurs to whose benefit? Is it not better the farmers and their servants should live comfortably, than that the landlords, who are much less numerous, should live luxuriantly?

Edinburgh Review, No. 118, p. 291.

For a more detailed exposition of the inequality of the land-tax assessment, see the Scotsman newspaper of October 16th, 1833.

Let it not be inferred from this that we consider the general principles of taxation in this country just, they are monstrously unjust. Ostensibly taxes on consumption are fair taxes, since they apparently form a voluntary contribution by each person according to his income or expenditure. But in practice this mode of raising the revenues is productive of great injustice; for taxes levied on articles of ordinary use are very unequal in their pressure on the several classes of the community. Taxes, for example, on beer, tea, or sugar, fall with disproportionate weight on the industrious orders. A poor man uses as much beer or tea as a rich man; but an impost is manifestly unfair which annually abstracts the same sum from an income of £50 as from one of £50,000.

The Wesleyan Methodists have declined taking any part, as a body, in the question of the separation of church and state. It is well known this numerous sect forms a sort of trade union, governed by a conference of preachers, who sit with closed doors, and prohibit, if possible, any public report of their proceedings. At the last meeting of conference in London the Rev. Jabez Bunting quoted a letter of Mr. Charles Wesley, in the course of which Mr. C. Wesley observes,—“my brother John’s principle is first the methodists, then the church; I say first the church then the methodists.” The conference’s view, Mr. Bunting said, was John’s not Charles’s—first the methodists and then the church; it was not methodism first and then dissenters.

Upon this construction one remark may be offered. Ought not the methodists to act upon what they conceive would have been John Wesley’s opinion had he now lived, rather than upon an opinion expressed when the methodists stood in very different relations to the church? Mr. Wesley was a shrewd and ambitious man; with his infant sect he did not wish to create unnecessary enemies, he rather sought to increase his followers under the protecting wing of the church than wantonly provoke its hostility. Humility is the great secret by which all low and contemptible things rise into importance. With the position the methodists now occupy it is impossible to divine Wesley’s course of conduct; he would have found it difficult, we imagine, to reconcile the pride, worldliness, and ostentation of the church with his own evangelical spirit.

Dr. Southey, and other episcopalians, have long been wooing the methodists to a more intimate union with mother church, as a sort of make-weight and means of giving them at least numerical superiority. We wish them joy of the acquisition. A sort of mob appears essential to the maintenance of every species of usurpation over human rights and reason.

That the universities are public establishments may be inferred from the fact that a preacher for each university, and the professors of divinity, law, physic, history, and botany, at both Oxford and Cambridge, receive stipends payable out of the taxes.

Report of the United Committee of Dissenters, May 8th, 1834.

Burn’s Ecclesiastical Law, p. 456, art. Mills.

The Poor-Law Commission originated with, and was formed by the late lord chancellor. His lordship, about twenty years ago, gulped down some raw and abstract dogmas on the tendency of a compulsory rate for the relief of the poor, and the commissioners were set to work to establish by evidence these old ‘foregone conclusions.’ They did their bidding certainly; for the zeal with which they got up criminatory matter against the poor was assuredly not exceeded by that with which the agents of power in Italy filled the famous green bag against the unfortunate queen Caroline. If we are not sadly deceived, some of them have drawn the long bow most egregiously. For example, in the budget of stuff circulated, ‘by authority,’ under the name of ‘Extracts,’ we cannot help thinking that the representations at pp. 216, 296, and 393, are so coloured and exaggerated as to be as remote from the plain facts of the case as truth from falsehood. We have no penchant for paupers, either parish or state, but we must protest against fighting any enemy with unfair weapons.

In their Report the Poor-Law Commissioners suggested that the place of birth should alone determine the place of settlement; that is the event in a man’s personal history the most remote and often the most obscure and debateable. How frequently it happens in the London parishes that an applicant for relief cannot tell the magistrate where he was born! The last thing we know of a person is often his birth-place. The honour of giving birth to Homer was contested by nine Grecian cities. In modern times the examples are numerous. There have been many wagers and disputes about the birth-place of Mr. Moore and the ex-Chancellor. That one was born in Ireland and the other in Scotland is obvious enough to those who have seen or heard them; but the “whereabouts” in the two incorporated kingdoms is the mystery.

For specimens see pages 31-34 of the printed speech, or still better, the morning newspapers, which gave a more authentic version of what was actually uttered. By similar flights of extravagance a late barrister, Balderdash Phillips, some years since attracted great crowds of ladies to Bible meetings.

The flight of birds for instance. In the first edition of his ‘Discourse on the Objects of Science,’ lord Brougham had stated (p. 27) that birds which build in the rocks drop or fly from height to height in cycloids; that being the most rapid mode of moving from one point to another. On being told of the incorrectness of the statement, he replied, “Let it stand notwithstanding; though not true it is pretty.” Effect, not truth, the object sought.

We have before remarked (p. 26) that the Dissenters are the community, being a majority of the population. This is a fact. In round numbers at the present moment the Dissenters have been estimated to be in

While the total population of the United Kingdom is only 24,271,763.

Letter to the duke of Wellington, on creating peers for life.

A commission has been appointed to ascertain the suitableness of poor-laws for Ireland. It consists almost exclusively of embryo barristers—mere boys some of them—who are furnished with a number of cut and dry questions, ranged under the heads of ‘bastardy, old age,’ &c. to direct their inexperience, and most likely prepared by the ‘dowager chancellor.’ What confidence can be placed in the results of an investigation conducted by such instruments? With the exception of one or two English gentlemen, not a person on the commission is qualified for the undertaking.

A parliament was summoned in the 6 Henry IV. from which all lawyers and other persons ‘skilled in the law’ were excluded by special precept of the sheriffs. Of course we have no wish to follow this precedent. Notwithstanding our remarks on the influence of lawyers and placemen, the reader will bear in mind our testimony, at the commencement of the chapter, to the generally popular composition of the Reformed House of Commons. That this is the impression of the Tories is evident from their having resolved on its dissolution. Since the first edition of the Appendix we have seen the following classification of the Opponents and Supporters of the Peel-Duke Ministry:—

Without adverting to the position taken up by the Stanley party on ecclesiastical reform, see the conflicting opinions, as reported in the Parliamentary Debates of June 23d and August 14th, of lords Brougham, Lansdowne, Russell, and Althorp, on the future disposal of the surplus property of the Irish church. To be sure, dissentions from this source might have been averted, in consequence of the subsequent principle adopted by the Cabinet. As the Melbourne ministry had determined to give a large portion of the tithes to the landlords, it is not likely any great surplus would have remained to dispose of either in the Irish or English church.

For a definition of this term, see Mrs. Austin’s Characteristics of Goethe.

In some parts of Ireland it is ‘safer to violate the law than to obey it.’ According to the testimony of Mr. Littleton, the late secretary for Ireland, two murders upon an average are daily reported to the Castle; how many unreported ones are perpetrated cannot be estimated. Among Irish horrors the most revolting, next to tithe butcheries, are the fights between the clans. At the last Ballyheagh races (June 24th) there was a faction-battle of this sort between the Cooleens and Lawlors, in which upwards of 1000 persons were engaged, of whom eight or ten were killed in the affray, and thirty-five drowned in the river; the savage wretches on the bank, by stones and sticks, doing their utmost to prevent the escape or rescue of their sinking opponents! Yet there is no police—no magistracy—no priesthood—no resident proprietary—to prevent the repetition of these frightful outrages against humanity and social order.

Notwithstanding we must remind this nobleman of an unperformed engagement. In the House of Commons, Aug. 16, 1833, lord Althorp pledged himself, next session, to bring in a bill to modify one of the Six Acts, which imposed restraints on periodical works of a political character. Did the influence of lord Melbourne, who voted in favour of the Six Acts, prevent the redemption of this pledge by his lordship?