PREFACE.

ANOTHER year has elapsed, of no small interest to the Church at large, as well as to that branch of it to which we belong. The enemy within the camp has confessed its policy, has enlarged on its hopes and fears; and certainly, if boldness be a paramount quality for a theological party, it has earned to itself lasting commendation. Would that Would that we could say, "evasit, erupit!” but, alas! though one leader has developed himself into absolute Romanism, it is too bold a flight for the followers. They remain; and God gives us a work of patience and of faith. As, during the two years of our existence, we have pursued the Tractarians by exposing their writings and movements in detail, so we trust to persevere, until our Church shall shine forth in all the lustre of unity. It would not become us to enlarge on the kind sympathy, rendered more kind by the manner of its expression, which has been shewn towards us by the leading opponents of Tractarianism, and by those whose position and name make us peculiarly sensitive as to their opinion. It would be honour enough to labour in defence of God's truth, and of our Church, without man's applause. It is a privilege to stand in the forefront of the battle, and to raise a voice in defence of our Church from every aspersion; whether of Romanists within our nominal pale, who identify her with Roman errors; or of Romanists, publicly so called, who accuse her of heresy and of schism. Resting on the rock of truth, the written

word, the Church of England cannot fear, nor will it condescend to maintain its cause by, subtleties and sophistry. It leaves such weapons for their inventors, and it lives confidingly in the hearts of its people. It has the security of truthfulness, and proclaims its credentials, and has no fear lest a designing adversary should discover in them a flaw. On these grounds, we ever have opposed Tractarians, and shall persevere in so doing. We cannot claim credit for having prophesied the present secessions, as it has long been strikingly evident to every unprejudiced person, that, naturally and necessarily, Tractarianism flows into Romanism To have imagined the contrary, would have evinced far more of weakness than of charity. Charity forms correct opinions, and acts and speaks decisively; with a view, at least, to save the tempted, if it be not able to convert the tempter.

THE

CHRISTIAN'S MONTHLY MAGAZINE.

POLICY TO IRELAND,

PROMISED, PRESENT AND PROSPECTIVE.

1. "The Ministerial Policy in Ireland: its effects on the Church and State." By J. C. Colquhoun, Esq., M.P. for Newcastle-under-Lyme. London: Rivington. 1845.

2. "Part of a Speech in the House of Lords against the Maynooth Grant. (With Additions.)" By the Duke of Manchester. Seeley: London. 1845.

3. "Church Principles and Church Measures. A Letter to Lord John Manners, M. P. With Remarks on a Work entitled 'Past and Present Policy of England towards Ireland.'" By Dr. C. Wordsworth, Jun., D. D. London: Rivington.

1845.

THE origin of the pamphlets which we have prefixed to this article is amusing, if not instructive. The Duke of Manchester prints his remarks, because the Marquis of Normanby has described his speech as something beyond a "paroxysm of fanaticism." The noble Marquis having served his apprenticeship in Ireland, and having so lately ceased to write novels, which were more harmless in their effects than if they had been more generally read or even known, thinks fit to denounce any man who believes his own religion true, with as much zeal as if he himself practically believed all equally false. We presume the Duke of Manchester has no objection to share his troublesome assailant conjointly with the Bishop of Cashel. It would be as true to charge Lord Normanby with reckless irreligion, as to describe the speech of the Duke in such language as he used.

Dr. Wordsworth, the author of the third, has written his letter with a view to answer Lord John Manners; and we presume that Mr. Colquhoun has published the most important part of his speeches because he believes them to be as unanswerable as they are unanswered. Each is very valuable in its sphere, and we are as much at a loss, after Dr. Wordsworth's pamphlet, to imagine how any consistent Churchman can support our present policy to Ireland, as we are, after reading Mr. Colquhoun's, to discover why any man of sense can dream of beneficial results from the mass of apostacy which the ministry have manifested. Such pamphlets must argue their way, and recall men to principles. Enough sacrifice has been made to party. Enough energy has been wasted on schemes of mere policy. The character of the Christian has been deemed of little importance when weighed against the name of a partisan. In consequence, truth has avenged itself on us, and expediency has become dominant, if not fatally to our national prosperity, at least to our consistency as Churchmen and as Protestants. The energy of Churchmen was to no purpose put forth against a Whig Ministry, if its results are that we have a cabinet which casts itself on the patience of its opponents, and coquets with its rivals, disdaining the support of those who conscientiously retain the principles which they formerly professed on the hustings, and at every possible opportunity.

We are quite aware that Lord John Russell made many deadly blows against the Irish Church, which have partly been averted—partly have succeeded. It is not so long since, as to have escaped our memory, that, since 1830, 25 per cent. has been spoliated from the only Catholic Church. of Ireland. We are conscious that Church cess has been abolished, and that by this means £78,000 or £80,000 per annum have been abstracted, if not purloined, from the service for which it was intended.* Besides this, we are ashamed to say that our Legislature, at the same unhappy period, gave the power of commuting ecclesiastical leases into fee-simples, which, according to the author of "Past and present Policy," &c., "has turned out so good a bargain for the lessees, that it has been "calculated to be worth generally not less than 50 per cent., or to have "doubled the value of their property."

In the review of this work, we have shown that its author recommends wrong by wrong, and, therefore, our readers will not be surprised to find that the same gentleman considers it unfair and untrue to call these "acts of spoliation," although he is ready to confess that "they undoubtedly indicate anything rather than a pious horror of

*See Sir Thomas Freemantle's speech against Mr. Ward's motion, April 23, 1845. See, also, "Past and Present Policy towards Ireland," p. 341.