1
10
13
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/a9efc2c9c72fe92da7ebcb3d6bddb903.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=s5VENnelOrGBq6-v1VZ3srU5XWBzerAmd4A1Q7uzJdIVW6gM-loGW7CnsXjMSJ88i%7E5QM%7Eh7c2TDe-IsIontI87I4mGub7Q-BaME%7EivcYRGtMIIoMZE2msd3E%7ECIYSAINfMBNDkGojJAm1o%7EUeQcfZfTO53UpwuRVJwCws3Y7z1BuzwIyVJ5kTtlJIGrau49oFSCT%7EbGB2plvIZbTFQoMKtwVYx-TELn4bCFHadjcgXRbyp6GCmBa46v6i8GgWOIOXvRGNSlExjDNAvs1MLn%7EV8cBn5FTTMBFllN8AQYWUjjpxjQ7e-vMgkOLvSEoOG93Sl84twwrwaBH12bSeyyFQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f8c1da73a5ec290ef8f315c0de2d243a
PDF Text
Text
ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.
AN EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINES
HELD BY THE CLERGY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
ON THE
SUBJECT OF FUTURE PUNISHMENT.
WITH
SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE TEACHING OF BISHOPS PEARSON AND
BUTLER, ARCHBISHOP WHATELY, THE BISHOP OF OXFORD, THE
BISHOP OF NATAL, THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN,
DR NEWMAN, AND THE REV. F. D. MAURICE.
BY
PRESBYTER ANGLICANUS.
[Reprinted, with Additions, from the "National ReviewNo. XXXI, for January, 1863.]
WITH
AN APPENDIX,
CONTAINING
A
REPLY
TO THE
ARTICLE
ON
UNIVERSALISAT
AND
ETERNAL-
rUNISHMENT IN THE “ CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER,” NO. CNN, FOR
APRIL, 1863, AND SOME REMARKS ON A SERMON ON
EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT, BY THE REV.
E. B. PUSSY, D.D.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY CHARLES W. REYNELL,
LITTLE PULTENEY STREET, HAYMARKET.
�ê
�CONTENTS.
--------------SECTION I.
State
or
Beliee with Regard to the Doctrine
Punishment.
oe
Eternal
PAGE
Belief of the Clergy of the Church of England
.
.
Tendency of Modern Thought .
.
.
.
Practical Difficulties of Missionaries
.
.
.
Their Bearing on the History of the Old Testament
.
Tacit Rejection of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment
»
Necessary Inferences from this Doctrine .
.
.
Differences in the Expression of this Doctrine
.
.
Its Repulsive Character, as admitted hy the Dean of St Paul’s
The Appeal to Authority .
.
.
.
.
The Denial of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment not necessarily
Result of Lax Practice and General Unbelief .
.
Foundation ofWIie Doctrine of Endless Punishment
.
..
Extent of Belief in this Doctrine
.
.
‘ .
. 1
.3
. 4
.5
. 6
.6
.
7
7
. 8
a
.9
. 9
.12
SECTION II.
Teaching
of the
Clergy of the Church of England
of Eternal Punishment.
on the
Subject
Two-fold Division involved in this Doctrine as drawn out by Mr
Newman
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 13
Practical Effects of this Division
.
.
.
.15
Statements of the Bishop of Oxford
.
.
.
. 15
Inferences from these Statements
.
.
.
.18
Their Bearing on the Proportion of Punishment
.
.
. 20
The Idea that Sin may be Compensated by a Fixed Penalty
.
. 21
The Victory of Righteousness over Sin .
.
.
.22
Pictures of Pandemonium
.
.
.
.
. 23
Relation of the Saved to those who are Lost
.
.
.24
Necessity of Maintaining that the Lost become wholly Evil
.
. 25
Theory of Archbishop Whately that the Good can shake off all thoughts
of the Lost .
.
.
.
... 26
�IV
Bishop Copleston’s Inference from the Wide Prevalence of Evil
. 27
Season of Probation .
.
.
.
... 28
The Archbishop of Dublin on the Parable of the Pich Man and the
Beggar .
.
.
.
.
.
.29
Dr Trench’s Reference to the Opinion of Bishop Sanderson on the Rich
Man’s Good Things .
.
.
.
.
. 31
Dr Trench’s Judgment on those who do not admit his Theory of
Punishment
.
.
.
.
.
.31
Bishop Pearson on Endless Punishment
.
.
.
. 33
Mr Maurice on the Meaning of the Word Eternal
.
. 34
The Theory that Moral’ Obligation rests on the Conviction of Endless
Punishment .
.
.
.
.
.
. 35
Experience of Human Legislators
.
.
.
.37
Archbishop Whately on the Idea of Civil Penalties
.
. 37
SECTION III.
Philosophical Arguments Alleged in Depence
Endless Punishment.
of the
Dogma
of
The Argument from Analogy as Treated by Bishop Butler .
. 38
Butler’s Theory of Human Nature .
.
.
.
. 39
Contradictions between the Ethics of Butler’s Sermons and his Argu
ments from Analogy
.
.
.
.
.40
Butler’s Formal Notion of Government
.
’ ♦
.
. 41
His Argument from the Besults of Sin in this Life
.
. 42
Butler’s Beference to the Doctrines of Heathen Writers
.
. 43
Argument from Human Law .
.
.
.
.45
SECTION IV.
Present State of the Controversy as Bearing
Duties of the Clergy of the Church
Position and
England.
on the
of
Beal Reason for the Popular Theories of Inspiration .
.
Contrast between Belief and Practice in the Present Day .
Recent History of Beligious Belief in England
.
.
Its Effects on the Clergy of the Church of England
.
Duty of the Clergy
.
.
.
.
.
Judgment of the Court of Arches in the Case of Fendall r. Wilson
Charges of Evasion
.
.
.
.
.
Present State of the Controversy
.
.
. 46
. 47
. 48
. 49
. 49
. 50
. 51
.52
�ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.
--------- ♦---------
SECTION L
State of Belief with regard to the Doctrine of
Eternal Punishment.
HE Church of England has not declared expressly that
the probation,
defi
Tnitively with thetrial, orofeducation of man is endedmembers,
close
the present life. Her
therefore, are free to entertain the hope or affirm their
■assurance that hereafter, as well as here, the good and the
bad alike are in the hands of a righteous Father, who will
so deal with them that, when the last enemy has been
destroyed, God shall be all in all. Such is the decision
which has roused the wrath and indignation of certain
parties in the English Church, who wish to make the
acceptance of their own dogmas the exclusive test of
Church membership. Legally, their opponents have made
good their standing ground, and may afford to pass over in
silence the imputations of dishonesty or want of orthodoxy,
which are thrown out against them. But they have pro
voked a contest on the most vital of all questions : they
have undertaken to do battle with popular conceptions of
the Divine Nature ; and it would ill become them to take
shelter under legal bulwarks, as though these alone consti
tuted the strength of their cause. They may be safe from
legal prosecutions, but they have to convince the people
that, on the momentous subjects of Eternal Life and Eternal
Death, a number of propositions are still commonly main
tained, which are not sanctioned by the English Church,
�1
Eternal Punishment.
which are utterly opposed to the whole spirit of Chris
tianity, and which obscure or obliterate all distinctions
between right and wrong. Theological writers, who profess
to define the limits of historical criticism, find it convenient
to represent their position as the only foundation for
Christianity itself: and it becomes indispensably necessary
to declare that the real question at issue is one which will,
not be set at rest, even though the history of the Exodus,
were proved to be in every particular true. Behind all
discussions on the authority of the Bible lies the oneabsorbing subject of human destiny. It is better and more
honest to declare at qnce that on this question only one
answer will ultimately satisfy the English people ; and it
is no light thing that we are enabled now to assert thatthe Church of England has returned this answer. In herinterest, next only to that of truth and justice, we desireto speak. She is facing a great danger; but that danger
arises from the spread, not of historical criticism, but of a
feeling of doubt whether her voice is raised to proclaim
unreservedly the absolute righteousness of God. Her
authority is falsely claimed for a vast scheme of popular
theology. Amongst her ministers, some few openly de
nounce parts of this scheme, many practically ignore it,
while.others uphold it by arguments which would make it
indifferent whether we worship God or whether we worship
Moloch. It bodes no good to a Church when the great
body of its lay members suspect that the Clergy are up
holding a system of dogmas, in some part of which at
least they do not believe. It is a still darker sign if they
come to think that these dogmas impute what, amongst
men, would be called the worst injustice to a Being who is
represented as infinitely merciful and loving. It becomes,
therefore, a question of paramount importance to ascertain
what is, in fact, the practical teaching of the Clergy on the
subject of Eternal Punishment, and whether that teachingis consistent with itself and with the religion on which it
professes to rest.
It is impossible to put aside a subject which forces
itself upon all at every turn. The course of thought and
criticism at home, the practical and more urgent needs of
missionaries abroad, will again and again demand answers
�Eternal Punishment.
3
to questions which, all feel to be of greater moment than
any other. The age which has fearlessly scrutinized the
histories of Greece and Rome, which has laid down the
laws by which these are to be judged, and has applied these
laws with rigid impartiality to all researches or speculations
whether they tell for or against the orthodox belief, will
*
hot be hindered from examining the grounds of the
doctrines which fix the destinies of all mankind. If these
doctrines seem to be opposed to ordinary human morality,
little stress may for the present be laid on the inconsistency ;
but when they claim to be part of a Divine Revelation
which is contained in an infallible Book, it becomes a mere
question of fact whether they really belong to that Revela
tion, and whether the records, on which they rest, are
absolutely true. It may be long before these questions are
answered: but in the meanwhile the signs become daily
more and more apparent, that the thoughts of men are
running in this direction. The clergy, generally, are well
aware of this. The old language on the subject of hell
torments is not often heard at the present day; and the
passing reference to them is commonly followed by the
tranquil announcement of a just retribution for all sin.
While the clergy in this country feel that anything more
would be practically thrown away, they find it at once an
easier and a more worthy task to insist on those truths
which neither they nor their people in their secret hearts
deny. From time to time men of greater honesty and
greater courage give utterance to what is working in the
minds of others, and plainly show that not merely the
course of modern criticism, but- our first religious instincts
make the subject of Eternal Punishment the great, question
of the age.
Twice, at least, within the last twelve years, something
like a plain answer has been given to this question. The
* The criticisms of Sir Cornewall Lewis are directed with equal severity
against the reconstructed Assyrian History of Mr Rawlinson and the Egyp
tology of Baron Bunsen. The former is supposed to corroborate the His
tory of the Old Testament, the latter to upset it. To the historical critic
either issue is wholly beside the question; but, of course, his weapons may
strike that which he had no conscious intention of assailing. Minucius
Felix never thought of the labours of Samson when he thrust aside those of
Hercules by the famous criterion : “ Qute si facta essent, fierent; quia fieri
non possunt, ideo nec facta sunt.”
�4
Eternal Punishment.
Theological Essays of Mr Maurice roused an opposition
scarcely less vehement than ‘ Essays and Reviews ; ’ but
it was comparatively an easy thing to say that the former
lost half then- force by the writer’s seeming love of paradox;
while the latter have been commonly regarded as the
ambiguous utterances of men who felt more than they
dared to put down in words. The practical needs of the
missionary are not so easily set aside. It is one thing to
speak in this country of heathens as being destined to
torments which shall have no end, and another to insist
before the heathen themselves that all sin not repented of
at the hour of death will plunge the sinner into endless
misery. The inconceivable fearfulness of the penalty
deprives it, with many, of its force and meaning; and the
greatest vehemence in depicting its terrors is followed by a
deeper unbelief. It is a moral difficulty under which the
missionary may console himself with reflections on the
hardness of the human heart. There are other difficulties
of an intellectual kind, with which, if he is an honest man,
• he will find it more difficult to deal. But whether of the
one kind or the other, it is far better that they should be
forced on our attention from the actual wants of the heathen,
than by writers whose words may be attributed to a love
of restless speculation. In his commentary on St Paul’s
Epistle to the Romans, the Bishop of Natal admits that the
task of teaching Christian doctrine “ to intelligent adult
natives, who have the simplicity of children, but withal the
earnestness and thoughtfulness of men .... is a sifting
process for the opinions of any teacher who feels the deep
moral obligation of answering truly and faithfully and
unreservedly his fellow-man looking up to him for light
and guidance, and asking, 1 Are you sure of this ? ’ ‘Do
you know this to be true ? ’ ‘ Do you really believe that ? ’ ”
The Zulus of Southern Africa are not slow in drawing the
logical inferences from the dogma of Eternal Punishment,
as ordinarily understood and set before them: but they are
more ready to question its justice than to adopt the belief
which drove Antony and Macarius into the Nitrian desert.
Many a wife in England has asked her husband in anguish
of heart, how it could be right to bring children into a life
which may be followed by a doom so unimaginably dreadful;
�Eternal Punishment.
5
the Zulu knows well how to appreciate the sophistry which
seems to satisfy the mothers of Englishmen.
*
Thus far his questions concerned chiefly his own per
ceptions of the justness and fitness of things ; but it was
impossible that they could stop short here. Bishop Colenso
has had to answer others, not less searching, on the origin
and earliest condition of man ; and he has answered them
with equal truth and candour. He may have spoken to
them, in past years, of the Fall of Man as a time when
“ the vessel which God had fashioned for Himself” became
polluted with sin, and when His purpose seemed “ blighted
by the cunning of the Tempter;” but the questions of his
people have not failed to lead him in due time to a closer
scrutiny of the book from which these notions have been de
rived. He had come to the plain conclusion that the Ever
lasting Fire does not necessarily mean a punishment which
is endless ; the same earnest examination of the popular
belief respecting the Fall has led him to an equally clear
conviction that no such lapse from a state of perfect
goodness and purity ever took place. It is not merely that
modern science has set aside statements in the Book
of Genesis, and shown that physical death was not the re
sult of Adam’s sin, that the serpent from its creation moved
as it moves now, and that thorns and thistles sprang up
from the ground ever .since vegetable substances came into
being.f The fabric falls more .from its own want of cohe
sion than from any assaults of modern science. If the
second chapter of Genesis in almost every respect contra
dicts the first, if the whole chronology of the book simply
brings up a mass of insuperable difficulties, an inquiry is
opened which must be followed to its results, and of which
one result atTeast must be to dispel the idea that any texts
* At the least, the latter can be silenced by being told that the married
state has been pronounced holy, and that their children will be brought into
a world where they will have full opportunity of attaining to life unless
they deliberately choose death. The Zulu would probably think no answer
satisfactory which did not reverse the conclusion of Sophocles :
fii] (pvva.i
top airavTa vitca Xtyov.
t See Professor Owen’s-Lecture “On Certain Instances of the Power
of God,” delivered before the Young Men’s Christian Association at Exeter
Hall. Longman and Co.
�6
Eternal Punishment.
of the Bible can be suffered to override the plainest dictates
of the human heart.
These are things on which the nation at large will
soon have to make up its mind. But while the doctrine
of an Endless Punishment for all men dying with un
repented sin is still asserted by many to be the doctrine
of the Church of England, and while from time to time we
have explanations of its nature which leave us in doubt
of the speaker’s meaning, how are we to explain the fact
that it should be less and less frequently brought before
the people ? A real conviction of its truth would lead men
to dwell on it to the exclusion of almost every other, to
enforce it by night and by day with a vehement and
untiring energy. Instead of this, the Bishop of Natal
asserts, and asserts truly, that the dogma is “ very seldom
stated in plain words in the presence of any intelligent
congregation.” If prominently brought forward, it is
generally before the ignorant and before children.
Put in the simplest way, this doctrine asserts that the
condition of every man is irrevocably fixed at the moment
of his death, that owing to the Fall of Adam the natural
doom of all his children without exception is an unending
eternity of torments, that the death of Christ has, indeed,
redeemed mankind, but procured salvation only for those
who believe the Gospel and are baptized into His Church,—
that, further, every Christian must die in a state of peni
tence, and that any sin not repented of at the moment
of death consigns him to endless flames. Thus a sharp
line is drawn which divides all mankind into two classes,
while from the number of those who are saved not
only all openly evil-livers are cast out, but all heathen who,
having not the Law, have not been a law to themselves,
and among Christians all who have not died in the faith
of Christ. Thus, again, the gates of hell close on all who
may be set down as careless and indifferent, or as mere
moralists, or sceptics, or philosophers,-—all, in short, who
do not at the hour of death with true penitence place their
conscious trust in the Great Sacrifice of Christ. This
doctrine knows nothing of shades of character or degrees
of guilt; it may admit the salvation of really good heathen
men to whom the Gospel has never been preached, and
�Eternal Punishment.
7
possibly of all children dying before the commission
of natural sin. Ignorant Christians it regards as heathen,
and there can be no reason to exempt them from a doom
which awaits the vast mass, nay, almost the whole of the
latter.
This dogma may, of course, be enforced in ways indefi
nitely various. It may be so put as to make God’s hatred
of all sin the prominent idea, or it may be clothed with
the coarseness of the most vindictive passion. It may be
urged with the earnestness of the saint who is ready to
die for others, or with the horrible selfishness of the blas
phemer who professes to “ see the mercy of God in the
damnation of infants.” But, in whatever form it may be
put, the doctrine is in itself repulsive. Human nature
shrinks from a penalty which it cannot comprehend, and
of which it certainly cannot see the justice or purpose. In
the words of Dean Milman, “ To the Eternity of Hell
torments there is, and ever must be—notwithstanding the
peremptory decrees of Dogmatic Theology, and the reve
rential dread of so many religious minds of tampering
with what seems the language of the New Testament,—a
tacit repugnance.” * Doubtless there are many truths of
Christianity which may at first shock or startle those who
have grown up in a different philosophy. The cross of
Christ may be to the Jews a stumbling block and to the
Greeks an offence, but it is possible to mistake the nature
of this antagonism, or to exaggerate it until it becomes a
fiction. But there is no other doctrine which leaves on
the mind and heart an aching sense as of irremediable
pain—no other of which the real belief must throw a dark
shade over all human life, and tempt the believer to gird
himself with the cord of Dominic and Francis, and go forth
to snatch if but a few brands from the burning. There is
no other which sets the purest and most natural of human
affections in direct conflict with what is held to be the
Revelation of the Divine Will. If on the night of the
Passover there was not a house in Egypt in which there
was not one dead, there must be many dead in almost
■every Christian home, unless the terms of this dogma are
iP.
* Milman’s History of Latin Christianity. Book xiv., ch. 2, Vol. 6.
"Rd. TT
�8
Eternal Punishment.
set at nought. There is no man living who has not loved
those of whose conscious faith he can say nothing; there is
not one who does not still love some, perhaps many such,
on whose bodies the grave has closed. There is not one
who will not continue to love them till he himself comes
to die; and, in the meanwhile, he will vainly seek to under
stand how, after that time, he will become indifferent to
the doom of those whom he has loved and feels that ho
must love on earth.
It is clear that only the most stringent authority will
bring men to believe such a doctrine as this. Their own
conception of Divine Qualities and Attributes will neverguide them to it; they can only receive it on the express
revelation of God Himself that it is really true. Christians
have come to believe that God has actually revealed it,
and that the statement of this doctrine is found in the
Bible. They are conscious that it rests on nothing else,
and they feel that its hold on the human mind will be lost
if the authority of the -Book is assailed. They have to
believe that all morality falls to the ground if the endless
ness of hell torments is called in question; and hence to
all such doubts, however faint and however calmly urged,
the great barrier prescribed is the bulwark of Plenary
Inspiration. The very vehemence with which all doubts
are denounced as impious, seems itself to show that there
must be something which can only be maintained by the
exclusion or suppression of all doubts. The Roman Church
is under no necessity to assert the absolute truth even of
all doctrinal statements in the Old Testament or the New ;
she has not shown her wisdom when she has done so. The
dogmatic Protestant, who does not admit the existence of
any living infallible expositor of Truth, is compelled to rest
everything on the authority of a book ; and on this he must
take his stand the more obstinately, if he feels that there
is any one doctrine which only on such authority he would
himself maintain. The tendencies of modern thought are
sufficiently clear. Wild notions receive utterance and are
abandoned in rapid succession. The Positivist may look
forward to something not quite so attractive as the Nirvana
of the Buddhist. New schools of Psychology may main
tain that conscience and morality are the mere result of
�Eternal Punishment.
9
education and experience ; but it is manifestly against the
truth of facts to suppose that the tendency to a general unbe
lief is greater now than it was fifty years ago, or so great.
But although it may be true that the wants and
yearnings of the human heart are leading or will lead
men to a belief in the Incarnation, the Trinity in Unity, or
any other Truth flowing out of these, there are other
dogmas from which the very same wants and yearnings,
the same perceptions of the essential agreement between
Divine and human goodness, will altogether repel them.
The strong arm of Ecclesiastical authority, or the dictates
of temporal interest, or a dread of public opinion may lead
men to profess belief in them ; but if the doctrine of End
less Punishment were suffered to rest on the grounds which
have led some, who denied it before, to believe that Jesus
Christ is God and Man, no one can doubt that the great mass
of Englishmen would thankfully and indignantly reject it.
Nor would this rejection arise simply or at all from
merely selfish fears. Undoubtedly a doctrine which makes
the eternal doom of man dependent on the accident of his
condition at the time of death, and by which the sin of a
day, not repented of, nullifies the earnest obedience of a
whole life, may well make every man tremble for himself.
Still the main thought in the minds of the most sincere
believers will be not for themselves but foi’ others; nay,
the feeling of thankfulness at being rid of the dogma will
be the more intense, because now they can really and
without any sophistry or equivocation “ vindicate the ways
of God to man.” The charge that they who will not allow
the Everlasting Fire and Endless Punishment to mean and
to be the same thing, do so because they wish to introduce
a wild licence and crush all sense of law and duty, is an
idle slander or a childish dream. The Roman Catholic
consigns to the remedial fires of purgatory all who, though
dying penitent, have made little advance towards Chris
tian perfection; the Protestant, who in theory condemns
to endless perdition all but the few of whose faith and
goodness there can be no question, can hardly in practice
bring himself to speak of any as undergoing the pains of
hell. At the least he cannot so think of those whom hehas himself known and loved. He may have misgivings
�IO
Eternal Punishment.
as to the depth or sincerity of his friend’s faith and the
earnestness of his religious life ; but very large proofs of
actual vice will be needed to repress the confident assertion
that he has “ gone to Heaven.” Each Protestant, at least
in England, is loud in maintaining that all sinners are con
signed to Endless Punishment; each is equally anxious to
express his belief that his own friends are not to suffer
such a doom. Clearly then he, and not they who reject
his doctrine are making the laws of God of none effect,
and tampering with His absolute and unswerving justice.
By his system, they who are utterly unfit for so immediate
a change are transferred from the feeblest and most im
perfect Christian life here to the full blessings of the Saints
who have surrendered their will wholly to the will of God.
It is the orthodox Protestant and not his opponent who is
undermining the convictions of men that God is of a truth
the righteous judge. There is not the faintest evidence
that they who insist on gradations of punishment are
lessening “ the terrors of the Lord,” far less that they
are upholding any theories of what is called Univer
salism.
They have learnt, and their hearts tell them
that God hates all sin, and that all sinners must sooner
or later be brought face to face with his Everlasting
Wrath. They know that a man may shut his ears
to the voice of conscience here, but that the Undying
Worm, “ which writhed at times within him,” even in this
life, will then “ be commissioned to do thoroughly the work
which is needed.”* With the question of amount or
duration they resolutely decline to deal. The Wrath
of God must burn so long as there is any resistance to
be overcome; and to say that the soul will be delivered
after undergoing simply a certain fixed amount of painf is
to defeat the Justice of God and to impugn his Righteous
ness almost as much as it is impugned by consigning all
sinners to one and the same lot. They cannot in terms
deny that the resistance of the sinner may be infinite, or
presume in such case to determine the issue ; but they
maintain most strenuously that the Wrath of God will be
felt by all who need it without exception. “ The most
saintly character, when viewed in the light of God’s
* Colenso on the Epistle to the Romans.
P. 216.
f lb., p. 262.
�Eternal Punishment.
ii
Holiness, will have manifold imperfections, spots, and
stains, which he himself will rejoice to have purged away,
though it may be ‘by stripes,’-—by stripes not given in
anger or displeasure, but in tenderest love and wisdom, by
Him who dealeth with us as with sons.”* Nay, it would
seem impossible that the condition even of the sincere
penitent should have no reference to the condition of
others. “ When we consider how many of those who have
died in penitence may have been guilty themselves of cor
rupting and ruining others who have run a short course
of sin and been cut off in impenitence, have we no reason
to believe that, in some way or other, those who were once
the cause of this defacement of God’s image in the
persons of their fellow men or women, may likewise have
a share assigned to them in the work of restoration,—may
never attain (and, indeed, it is inconceivable that they
should attain, if the things of this world are at all remem
bered in the next, as we suppose they will be) their own
full joy, until the evil they have done shall have been, by
God’s Mercy, undone, and the powers of Hell vanquished
and swallowed up in life ?”f
Thus, in the present aspect of theological controversy,
we have a strange sight. Almost every science wins
ultimately into collision with some one or more state
ments of the Bible, and so calls into question indirectly its
general authority. The science of geology seems utterly
to contradict the cosmogony of the Book of Genesis;
astronomy knows nothing of any pause in the course of the
earth round the sun. The science of language appears not
altogether to favour the idea of an original unity of mankind, while the analysis of the speech and still more of the
mythology of the great Aryan race furnishes no proof
whatever that man started with high blessings which he
forfeited by sin.
Meanwhile, they, who uphold the
■orthodox belief, know well that these sciences, carried to
their utmost limits, are not likely to set aside, to use
Dean Milman’s words, “ the primal and indefeasible
truths of Christianity.” J They know that the keenest
* Colenso on the Epistle to the Romans. P. 202.
t lb., p. 218.
j Latin Christianity. Book xiv, ch. 10.
�12
Eternal Punishment.
scientific criticism cannot endanger the doctrine of that
Eternal Life, which belongs to all who do the will of God.
If these were the only truths to be defended, perhaps the
questions of Justification and Authority might be discussed
more calmly.
But there remains the one dogma of
endless punishment, which, if any flaw is found in the
popular theory of inspiration, must straightway fall; and
its defenders fight therefore with a vehement intolerance
only to be excused by their strange conviction that a denial
of it removes the ground-work of all morality.
In a few years the contrast will be more startling than it
is now. There yet live many who do not shrink from
putting forth this doctrine in its extremest and most un
compromising form. Men of great power, the spell of
whose eloquence has not yet been broken, draw out the
picture in its minutest outlines, well knowing that its
strength lies in concrete images and not in unsubstantial
generalities. There yet remain some, who seem (it can
scarcely be that they really are) eager to maintain that
“ utter unspeakable misery shall be the portion for endless
ages, for ever and ever ; alike for all, who are not admitted
at first into the realms of infinite joy,—that there shall be
no hope in the horrible outer darkness, for the ignorant
young child of some wretched outcast, who has been noted
by the teachers of the Ragged or the Sunday school as
having contracted some evil habit, it may be, of lying,
stealing, swearing, or indecency, any more than for the
sensual libertine, who has spent a long life in gratifying hislusts and has been the means of that child and others like'
it being born in guilt and shame, and nursed in profligacy.”*
Such, of course, are the logical results of the dichotomy
which severs all men at the hour of death into two
classes, and fixes accordingly their irrevocable doom. But
when Bishop Colenso asks, “ In point of fact, how many
thoughtful Clergy of the Church of England have ever
deliberately taught, in plain outspoken terms, this doctrine,
-—how many of the more intelligent laity or Clergy do
really, in their heart of hearts, believe it ?” the answer mustbe given that some whose names stand among the highest
in the land have set it forth in more glaring colours and
* Colenso on the Epistle to the Romans.
P. 207.
�Eternal Punishment.
*3
with more terrific minuteness than he has himself ventured
to imagine. It becomes nothing less than the duty of any
who know this from their own experience to show simply
under what forms this doctrine is presented to English men
and women, and still more to children, and what are the
conclusions boldly drawn and vehemently denounced from
axioms which utterly contradict them. The examples
shall be either from published works or else from oral
teaching, which doubtless the preacher would not care to
disavow.
SECTION II.
Teaching of the Clergy of the Church of England on
the Subject of Eternal Punishment.
Nowhere, perhaps, is the severance of all men into two
fixed classes at the hour of death more clearly and forciblv
stated than in a Sermon of Dr Newman on the Individuality
of the Soul.
*
Even over a dogma, to which, in Dean
Milman’s words, all have “ a tacit repugnance,” his singlehearted earnestness sheds some light and comfort, if not
for the dead, yet for the living. Knowing well that for the
good and the wicked Eternal Life and Eternal Death are
already here begun, he insists that the sinner is at present
under God’s Eternal Wrath, and not merely that he will be
so at some future time. Yet he shrinks not from complying
with the inexorable demands of his system. The invisible
line divides all mankind into these two classes ; and at the
moment of their death all who die unsanctified and unre
conciled to God pass at once into a state of endless misery.f
But he did not fail to see how little men generally believed
“that every one who lives or has lived is destined for
endless bliss or torment,” J and how the popular convictions
of Protestants opened the door of hope far more widely
than the purgatory of the Church of Rome. “Let a
person who is taken away have been ever so notorious a
sinner, ever so confirmed a drunkard, ever so neglectful
* Parochial Sermons. Vol iv., Serm. 6.
f Ib.} p. 103.
J lb., p. 100.
�14
Eternal Punishment.
of Christian ordinances, and though they have no reason
for supposing anything hopeful was going on in his mind,
yet they will generally be found to believe that he has gone
to heaven; they will confidently talk of his being at peace,
of his pains being at an end, and the like.”* If a theology
so lax rises in part from their inability to “conceive it
possible that he or that they should be lost,” he does not
forget that it is partly accounted for by natural affection.
“Even the worst men have qualities which endear them
to those who come near them;”f and therefore they
cling to the memory of the past and derive from it a
vague hope, which they do not care to sift too strictly.
But death not merely fixes the doom of the sinner; it
changes his nature, not in degree only, but in kind.
“ Human feelings cannot exist in hell.” J Others have not
shrunk from drawing out the many inferences involved in
their axiom; Mr Newman drew from it simply a warning
to fight the Christian’s battle more earnestly, and to hate
the sin against which the wrath of God is eternally burning.
In that Church, where he professes to have found both
refuge and solace, he has to propound a more merciful
doctrine. The two classes § remain, but the way of peni
tence and of hope is opened to vast numbers who, in the
strict belief of Anglicans, would be shut up' with the
sinners. Thus far in his new home he has been removed
some steps at least from “ the house of bondage.”
* Parochial Sermons. Vol. iv., Serm. 6. P. 103. f lb. 103. J lb., 104.
§ The tests laid down by Mr Newman, the Bishop of Oxford, and others,
are clear enough. The only question is as to their application. This
exhaustive classification has reference to the tares and wheat, the sheep and
the goats, in the parables of Our Lord. Mr Jowett (on the Epistle to the
Romans, &c., vol. i., p. 416, Essay on Natural Religion) will not say in which
of these two divisions we should find a place for the majority of mankind,
“ who have a belief in God and immortality,” but “ have nevertheless hardlv
any consciousness of the peculiar doctrines of the Gospel,” who “have never in
their whole lives experienced the love of God or the sense of sin, or the need of
forgiveness,” but who are often “ remarkable for the purity of their morals,”
for their “strong and disinterested attachments,” and their “quick human
sympathies,” and of whom “ it would be a mistake to say that they are
without religion.” The orthodox theologians would not share his hesitation.
These men confessedly, although members of the Church outwardly, do not
die consciously in the faith of Christ; and they must therefore be shut out
for ever from the presence of God. But they are just the men of whom
Protestants speak as having gone to Heaven, although their theory
consigns them to a very different doom.
�Eternal Punishment.
*5
The full meaning of Dr Newman’s axiom cannot be
comprehended until we bring before ourselves the various
shades of character which are included under the class of
impenitent sinners. One effect of such theology is to
paralyse the will for action where action is most of all
needed. If such a line of severance exists, there must be
those in heaven who were very nigh to hell, and some in hell
who were very near to heaven. To tell the young that
there are thousands in endless torment who have failed in
sight of the goal, thousands who have only not won the
prize, thousands who have been all
saved, is not likely
to supply the readiest motive to be up and doing. The
hardness of the conflict is yet further increased by theories
on post-baptismal sin, which tend practically to put it
almost beyond the reach of pardon; and faults which, if
committed before receiving the Sacrament of Regenera
tion, would be of but little moment, avail to crush down
the soul of the baptized for ever. But as long as the
exaggeration consists in making still more narrow the
strait road which leads to Life, no other difficulty arises
than the thought that God, who is All-merciful and Loving,
lays on his weak creatures a burden which they are scarcely
able to bear. When, however, we compare the teaching
of one man with that of others on the subject of Eternal
Punishment, we begin to see that tlieir doctrines not merely
represent the Divine Being as implacably revengeful and
utterly unjust, but rest on axioms which entirely contradict
each other, as well as certain articles of faith in which
all alike profess their belief. Dr Newman grounded his
description of the doom of sinners on the maxim that hell
is not the habitation of any human affections ; the teaching
of the Bishop of Oxford on this subject rests or rested on
a very different idea. Both would, of course, admit that
God awards to every man according to his work.
In a Sermon preached in the Parish Church of Ban
bury, on the 24th of February, 1850, the Bishop of Oxford
dramatised the Day of Judgment. He was preaching
especially to the young, to the boys and girls who had on
that day been confirmed by him; and he judged rightly
that nothing could enable them to realise the state of the
lost more vividly than a series of portraits representing
�i6
Eternal Punishment.
the several classes of impenitent sinners in judgment.
*
But, inasmuch as the example of the worst sort of mankind
would be of little practical use, he sought his warnings
•chiefly from those on whom the world would be disposed
to look favourably. The poet, the statesman, the orator,
the scholar and philosopher, the moralist, the disobedient
child, the careless youth, were in their turn described as
standing before the judgment seat. No touch was wanting
in each case to complete the picture ; and if the object was
to arouse the passion of fear, the preacher’s effort could
fail of success only with those who saw that that picture
was inconsistent with the constantly recurring statement,
that Hell contains nothing but what is simply and utterly
bad. As addressed to the young, it was, of course, neces
sary that his words should not do violence to a sense of
right and wrong, probably in most of them sufficiently weak,
or tend to lower or confuse ideas respecting the Divine
Nature, which were already sufficiently inadequate. How
far the Sermon was likely to produce such a result, may
perhaps be determined by taking a few of the examples
brought forward. After describing the death of the im
penitent, sometimes in torment, sometimes in indifference,
more often in self-deceit, the Bishop depicted them before the
judgment seat still possibly deceiving themselves until the
delusion is dispelled for ever by the words which bid them
depart into the lake of fire. “What,” he asked, “will it
be for the scholar to hear this, the man of refined and
* A discourse, addressed specially to children on their confirmation,
may be more fitly alleged as a specimen of ordinary parochial teaching than
a Sermon preached before a University audience. Yet the two Sermons oil
“ The Revelation of God the Probation of Man,” preached by the Bishop of
Oxford before the University in 1861, are entitled to all the credit due to
the Sermon at Banbury for plainness of speech. We cannot even enter on
an examination of the equivocal sophistry which runs through these
Sermons. We content ourselves with remarking that, on evidence which
has been much called in question, he makes a young man of great promise,
and much simplicity of character, die “ in darkness and despair''' before he
had reached the fulness of earliest manhood. The alleged cause is indul
gence in doubts,—of what kind, we are not told. Yet there is some difference
between the promulgation of an impure Manicheism and doubts on the accu
racy of the Mosaic cosmogony. Unquestionably, the Bishop is referring to
doubts of the latter kind ; and we need only say, that to condemn to endless
torments a young man of good life because he doubted whether the sun and
moon really stood still at Joshua’s bidding, is far worse than to consign to
the same fate the school-girl of the Banbury Sermon.
�Eternal Punishment.
17
elegant mind, who nauseates everything coarse, mean, and
vulgar, who has kept aloof from everything that may annoy
<or vex him, and hated everything that was distasteful.
Now his lot is cast with all that is utterly execrable. The
most degraded wretch on earth has still something human
left about him; but now he must dwell for ever with
beings on whose horrible passions no check or restraint
shall ever be placed.” 11 How, again is it with many, of
whom the world thinks highly, who are rich and well
to do, sober and respectable, benevolent and kind ?
Such an one has been esteemed as an excellent neighbour ;
he has had a select circle of friends whom he has bounti
fully entertained: he has prided himself on discharging
well the duties of a parent, host, and neighbour; and when
he dies there is a grand funeral and it is put upon his
tombstone that he was universally lamented, and that
society had suffered in him a real loss. What is the
ScriptufA comment on all this ? ‘ In hell he lifted up his
eyes being i\~? torments.’ ” He placed his hearers by the
death bed of the rfpk nian. “ See in the house of Dives
there are hurrying step,? and anxious faces; Dives is sick
and his neighbours are son’/ because he has been a good
neighbour to them, polite and nCsPdable and ever ready to
interchange the amenities of life. J’ives is sick, and his
brothers are sorry, because he has been & kind brother to
them, and now they must lose his care and ^assistance and
see him no more. Soon all is over. The b^ 'd^ bes in
state. His friends come together and attend it
tomb, and then place the recording tablet stating him to
be a very paragon of human virtues. Tor some months
they speak of their poor neighbour, how he would have
enjoyed their present. gaiety, how they miss him at his
accustomed seat; until at length he is forgotten. And
while all this is going on upon the earth, where is Dives
himself ? Suffering in torments because in his life time
he had received his good things.” But more terrible still,
and chiefly as being addressed to children, was the picture
of a school-girl cut off at the age of thirteen or fourteen.
In her short life on earth she had not seldom played truant
from school, had told some lies, had been obstinate and
disobedient. Now she had to bid farewell to heaven and
c
�18
Eternal Punishment.
to hope, to her parents, her brothers, and sisters ; and thenfollowed her parting words to each. What was her agony
of grief, that she should never again look on their kind and
gentle faces, never hear their well known voices ? All
their acts of love return to her again,—all the old familiar
scenes, remembered with a regret which no words can
describe, with a gnawing sorrow which no imagination can
realise. She must leave for ever that which she now knew
so well how to value, and be for ever without the love for
which she had now so unutterable a yearning. She must
dwell for ever among beings on whom there is no check or
restraint, and her senses must be assailed with all that is
utterly abominable. The worst of men are there, with
every spark of human feeling extinguished, without any
law to moderate the fury of their desperate rage. To com
plete the picture, the lost angels were mingled with thisb
awful multitude, in torment themselves and the instyd.
ments of torturing others. They stood round their auman
victims, exulting in their misery and increasing perpetually
the sting of their ceaseless anguish. T^e bodies of men
as well as them souls were subjected 'w their fearful sway,
and had to suffer all that fiend; ^ hatred.could suggest.
, .e /y11 ar iey seized
tortured by the instrument
? • ?S
?eran?eK
lustful man by the instrument of
hrs lust, the tyrant > the instrument of his tyranny.”
ver consi to' xP^ons involve some curious, and not
o-es't th^18
conclusions ; but chiefly, perhaps, they sugteent1 J ^ie (H®}rences between the ninth and the ninea centuries are not very great after all. The dsemono,gy of the Bishop of Oxford is almost more minute and
elaborate than that of Bede or William of Malmesbury.
'
*
But, leaving this, we have to mark that in this scheme, asin that of Mr Newman—
1. All mankind are divided into two classes at the hour
of death.
2. That hell is the abode of nothing that is not utterly
abominable.
* Bede, iii. 19; Malmesbury, ii. 2. It must be remarked that the details
of personal bodily torment imply physical contact of daemons, and run into
images which have their ludicrous as well as their fearful side.—See Mil
man’s Latin Christianity, Book xiv., ch. 2.
�Eternal Punishment.
x9
Bui it goes beyond the teaching of Mr Newman in
asserting—
3. That hell is a chaos of unrestrained passion, from
which all check of law and order has been permanently
withdrawn.
4. That all the inhabitants of hell are mingled together,
so that any one may attack another whenever he pleases,
and
5. That all, of whom we should be disposed to judge
most leniently, retain their better characteristics, remain
ing, in short, precisely what they had been on earth. This
last axiom seems scarcely to harmonize with those which
precede it.
On a subject of such fearful moment every statement
should be sifted with all sobriety and earnestness. It
might be not difficult to present illustrations, such as have
now been noticed, even under a ludicrous aspect; but it is
more seemly to ask calmly how, if these things are so, each
man is to be rewarded according to his works. The brutal
murderer and the blood-thirsty despot remain what they
were ; their cruelty is not lessened, their physical force
seemingly not abated. The philosopher and moralist, the
man of learning and elegant tastes, the child who has died
almost in infancy, remain also what they were ; and all,
murderers, philosophers, and children, are hurled together
into an everlasting chaos. The strong can choose out vic
tims who cannot resist them : the weak can find none to
torment in their turn, and, according to the supposition,
they have no wish to torment any one. Hell is not the
habitation of any human affection: yet the child carries
thither her love for her parents, her brothers, her teachers,
(the remembrance of good and holy lessons, which now she
has learnt to value, and for valuing which she must be the
better) nay, she yearns for their blessedness not only be
cause it is a condition free from torment, but because
they are with their Loving and Most Merciful Father.
The sceptical philosopher whose life was a pattern of
moral strictness, the man of refined habits, of ready bene
volence, and good feelings remain likewise what they were,
and they are to be punished by being thrown with those
who never had a thought or care whether for elegance,
�20
Eternal Punishment.
philosophy, or morality. The school-girl may be tormented
by Ahab or Caesar Borgia, Shelley may find himself as
sailed by Jonathan Wild or Commodus. It may well seem
*
profane thus to put names together ; but if such a theory
be true, the conclusion is perfectly justifiable, and we are
justified further in maintaining (1) that on this supposi
tion the punishment is wholly unequal, unless all have
committed the same amount of sin, and are equally steeped
in guilt (which yet they are admitted not to be) or unless
all become equally fiendish (which it is asserted that they
do not).
(2.) In either case the less guilty are the greater suf
ferers. If all are made equally diabolical by the mere
passing from this world into the next, still, in undergoing
this change, some will have lost much more good than
others, many losing very little, others losing a great deal.
And if they do not all become equally bad, then the sensi
tive and refined, the benevolent and honourable man will
be trampled on by furious beings, who will lead an endless
carnival of violence, and whom he can by no possibility
resist.
(3.) The latter class would scarcely be punished at all.
The remorse of conscience they may with whatever success
put aside, and on their passions there is to be, by the
hypothesis, no check whatever. Even while on earth,
they had shown only the faintest signs of good, and hacl
approached as nearly as possible to a delighting in evil for
its own sake. To take a number of the most hardened
criminals, and leave them shut up by themselves to their
own devices, would scarcely be called punishment in any
human code. To coop up with these other criminals of
quite a different stamp, weak, sensitive, and specially open
to softer and finer feelings, would indeed be punishment,
but it would be confined wholly to the latter, while it would
give a zest to the horrible passions of the former. But
further,—(4.) Evil, on this hypothesis, is to increase and mul
• To raise an objection on the score of mentioning names is to betray a
doubt as to the individual existence of all human souls after death ; nor did
Mr Newman fail to discern and to denounce all such hidden unbelief. See
more especially the Sermon already cited. (Vol. IV, Sermon 6.)
�Eternal Punishment.
21
tiply for ever. Bishop Butler’s Sermon on Resentment
will show clearly enough the course of that passion when
uncontrolled, even on earth. But here all check, divine
and human, is to be removed for ever. In some way or
other we are to suppose that all will feel the sting of
remorse ; but, according to this idea, they will at the same
time have the will and the power to repeat the sins for
which, they suffer, nay, to add to them sins incomparably
more tremendous.
(5.) But this notion puts almost wholly out of sight
the Undying Worm, and the Everlasting Fire of Divine
wrath. It represents the lost as preying on each other,
but it pictures none of them as brought face to face with
the Anger of God against all Sin. It reduces the punish
ment inflicted on sinners to mere vindictiveness, from
which even the idea of a stern though just retribution is
shut out. In other words, the sentence of an infinitely
Perfect Judge has nothing whatever moral about it. It is
a mere physical banishment, where sinners may or may not
feel the sense of an irreparable loss. The degree to which
they feel it has no reference to any action of God on their
hearts, but is determined wholly by the tenor of their life
on earth. In comparison with the sensitive moralist, the
ruffian will feel none ; and, in short, the Divine Hatred for
Sin will never be really brought home to him.
Yet further, the popular theology of the day leads the
mind to fasten on an utterly mistaken idea of the nature of
Eternal Punishment ■ it has led those who have indulged
themselves in framing theories of Universalism, to hold
that sin may be compensated by a fixed amount of punish
ment, like the definite penalties of human law. They who
maintain that all sinners suffer endless torment do so on
the ground that endless torment alone can be an adequate
recompense for any sin; it is no matter of surprise that
their opponents should believe in a deliverance from the
Eternal Fire after it has been endured for “ a sufficient
time.
Fixed penalties have no necessary tendency to
produce a change of character. “ It is true that human
laws, which aim more at prevention of crime than amend
ment of the offender, do mete out in this way, beforehand,
a certain measure of punishment for a certain offence.
�11
Eternal Punishment.
The man who covets his neighbour’s property may, if he
like, obtain it dishonestly, at a certain definite expense.
He knows that he may possibly escape altogether; or, at
the worst, he can only suffer this or that prearranged
penalty, after suffering which he may remain (so far as the
effect of the punishment itself is concerned, and unless
other influences act upon him) as bad and as base a
villain as before. But God’s punishments are those of a
Bather. . . . We have no ground to suppose that a
wicked man will at length be released from the pit of woe,
when he has suffered pain enough for his sins, when he has
suffered time enough, a 4 certain time appointed by God’s
Justice.’ But we have ground to trust and believe that a
man in whose heart there is still Divine Life, in whom
there lingers still one single spark of better feeling, the gift
of God’s Spirit, the token of a Father’s still continuing
Love, will at length be saved, not from suffering, but from
sin.”*
But the orthodox theology, which severs all men into
two classes, to be fixed at the moment of their death, still
maintains that the final cause of the Divine Government of
the world is the Victory of Righteousness over sin. It still
asserts that when the last enemy has been destroyed God
shall be all in all. Yet, according to the hypothesis of the
Bishop of Oxford, the vast majority of the whole human
race of all times and countries, all wicked heathen, all
wicked Christians, all children who die with faults not
repented of, all mere moralists, all men of indifferent or
negative characters, depart into a realm where Lawlessness
reigns supreme, and from which all external check has been
deliberately withdrawn. In this anarchy is involved the
permission and the power to sin afresh perpetually in
infinitely increasing ratio. Here undoubtedly the calcula
tion of numbers may, or rather it must, come in. The
children of Adam may be beyond any earthly census, but
they are not innumerable. As Mr Newman cautiously and
reverently expressed it, that which gives especial solemnity
to the thought of death “ is that we have reason to suppose
that souls on the wrong side of the line are far more
numerous than those on the right.”f It is dishonest and
* Colenso on Romans, p. 263.
f Sermons, Vol. IV (Serm. 6), p. 101.
�Eternal Punishment.
23
■cowardly to palter and dally with such a subject as this.
If the words of the Bishop of Oxford are true, then Satan,
who is the lord of this lawless realm, has for ever severed nine
tenths, possibly nineteen twentieths, possibly more, of the
whole human race from the Love and the Law of God.
Brom this vast Kingdom he has banished God; and in it
he may exult in the endless aggrandizement of sin. Some
very indisputable proof is needed for the belief that the
Victory of God means nothing more than this; and, ungu^stionably, no man
COLCOfi would ever speak thus
of any earthly King who had lost nineteen-twentieths of
his Kingdom, over which he had been obliged to abandon
all control. We might give him all the credit which a
qualified success deserves; we might say that he had put
bounds to rebellion, and prevented the rebels from harming
those who had not joined them; but it would be an absurd
mockery to say that he had overthrown and destroyed his
enemies and recovered all his ancient power. If popular
theologians speak truly, the Victory of God would be even
more partial, and Ahriman will indeed have triumphed
over Ormuzd.
We may dismiss from our thoughts such Pandemoniums
of unbounded ferocity. The most intense conviction of the
■endlessness of hell torments does not call for them., The
penalty of an undying remorse rather implies that they
who are lost shall not be suffered to torment each other.
The supposition that they are so permitted involves a per
petual miracle to keep such torture within due bounds, if
any pretence of justice in the measure of punishment is to
be maintained. It involves further the very strange idea
that they have the Divine Licence to commit a certain
amount of sin, and add perpetually each to his own amount
of guilt. The best form of the popular theology sweeps
.away all such monstrous absurdities, and interprets the
Undying Worm as an unavailing agony of remorse, an
indescribable and fruitless yearning after a Righteousness
.and Love which they have learnt too late to value. But if
it gets rid of some folly, it fails to meet or to remove the
.serious moral difficulties involved in the doctrine. It
asserts the strict apportionment of penalty according to
each man’s deserts; it leaves no room for any such just
�24
Eternal Punishment.
proportion. The very essence of proportion is the idea of
gradation; but “ can there be any possible gradation of
endless, infinite, irremediable woe ? . . . The very essence
of such perdition is utterly, and for ever and ever, to lose
sight of the Blessed Eace of God. . . . What would alL
bodily or mental pain whatever be, compared with theanguish of being shut out for ever and ever from all hopeof beholding one ray of that Light ? And even bodily or
mental pain, however diminished, yet if continued without
cessation or relief for ever and ever, how can this be spoken
bi aS ‘ fe'W stripes ’ ”* for any to whom few stripes are to
be apportioned ? It supposes the sinner to undergo .an
agony to which it will be impossible for him to realise any
increase ; to such an one the announcement that his neigh
bour’s sufferings are greater must appear only an idle and
malicious mockery. At the utmost he will only be able to
take in the difference by an intellectual effort. Is the
Divine Justice not concerned with convincing the sinner of
its own reality ?
But the orthodox theology has also to deal with the
relation of those who are saved to those who are lost.
Once, at least, they all meet for recognition before the
Throne of Judgment. There parents are to look on children
once loved and cherished, now appointed for the burning ;
there the husband is to see the wife whom he loved to the
last borne away into the lake of fire; there brothers, whose
love was one but whose lot is now different, are to take
their farewell, and to see each other again no more. That
the sinners shall mourn for the blessings which they have
lost, and. that their anguish should be increased by the very
consciousness that they who loved them once are blessed,
still, need perhaps in such a scheme present no great diffi
culty ; but the happiness of the righteous must not be
disturbed, and some solution must be found for the huge
perplexities so produced. No theologian ventures to assert
that we are to hate all sinners in this life ; rather, our love
should be deepened by the consciousness of their sin and need.
The miserable wretches who haunt the filthy courts of crowded
cities are to be sought out with the more tenderness and.
Colenso 'on Romans, pp. 199, 200.
�Eternal Punishment.
2$'
zeal, because they are exasperated against an order which,
to them, appears thoroughly iniquitous. Their blasphemies
are not to deter us from seeking to do them good; after a few
years are past, they will prevent God from so doing. In
some way or other, the Righteous in Heaven are to acquiesce
in a necessity which is laid on the Divine Being Himself.
We do not hate them now, but we shall hate them hereafter
nay, those who are lost shall retain their love for us long after
the last lingering feeling has been extinguished in ourselves..
We may struggle to escape from the labyrinth of unintel
ligible contradictions, but the conclusion remains that the
assurance of our own salvation will enable us to look with
serene indifference on the departure of lost friends into hell.
At the least, that conscientiousness will not be allowed to
interfere with our bliss. This can only be done by one of two
suppositions,—either we shall come to hate all sinners
because we detest sin, or we shall be able to forget sin and
sinners altogether.
But if it be impossible (as for men in this life at least
it would seem to be impossible) to feel an unmixed hatredfor any being not wholly evil, then the mere comfort of
those who are saved demands that all who are lost shall
cease to retain the least affinity with good. Hence it
became a logical necessity to maintain that hell is the
habitation of no human affections, or in other words that
the accident of death rendered wholly wicked those who
had been only partially wicked before. But if some
writers have discerned in the parable or history of the rich
man and the beggar, the evidence of this sweeping change,
the idea of hell torments enforced by the Bishop of Oxford
implies that over some at least no change has passed unless
it be one for the better. The philosopher and the moralist
retain their refined and kindly feelings ; the very essence
of their torture is that they do retain them and must retain
them for ever. The school-girl, who died with a lie on her
lips, still loves her kinsfolk and her friends, or, rather, she
has learnt to set on their love a value of which she had not
dreamed on earth. She has been taught to mourn over her
banishment from those who are good, over the thought
that she cannot with them share the love of God. The’
case may be put even more forcibly. According to
�26
Eternal Punishment.
Archbishop Whately, the terrors of the Day of Judgment will
be felt only by those “ who will then, for the first time, have
a faithful and tender conscience.”* That men should
have such consciences, is the special desire of the Divine
Spirit; and in this theory the Day of Judgment at once
accomplishes the victory of righteousness over sin by
■changing the hearts of all sinners. It is to this, then, that
the good have to look forward; and, if memory survives in
Heaven, it must tell them that the gates of hell have closed
-on faithful and tender consciences. The prospect may be
bewildering ; the retrospect would be intolerable. In two
ways only can men, during this life, deal with the thoughts
so forced upon them. All other feelings may here be
swallowed up in a fierce vehemence to save the souls of
■others and our own. The idea of endless vengeance may
send us forth to drive men into Heaven with the ecstatic
fervour of Knox or Loyola; or else our efforts may be
■centred on ourselves. The one aim of life may be to force
our way through gates which can be opened but to few.
We may learn to crush all natural feeling, and the selfish
ness so acquired we may carry into Heaven. The very
intensity of our joy may lie in the thought that we have
escaped the fires which are tormenting those whom we had
known on earth. Archbishop Whately shrinks from this
idea of a triumph worthy of Mahomet or Montanus. In
his belief, we shall be able in Heaven to do effectually what
we can only in part accomplish here. On earth a good
man, “ in cases where it is clear that no good can be
done by him, strives, as far as possible, though often
without much success, to withdraw his thoughts from evil
which he cannot lessen, but which still, in spite of his
effort, will often cloud his mind. We cannot, at pleasure,
■draw off our thoughts entirely from painful subjects which
it is in vain to meditate about,—the power to do this com
pletely would be a great increase of happiness.” The
blessed “ will be able, by an effort of the will, completely
to banish and exclude every idea that might alloy their
happiness.”f It might have been an easier, perhaps a
more merciful, solution to extinguish at once and for ever the
* Scripture Revelations of a Future State, p. 158.
t Scripture Revelations of a Future State, pp. 282, 283.
�Eternal Punishment.
27
memory of their life on earth. The theory of Archbishop
Whately is one which not a few good men would reject for
themselves in this life, and which the great founders of the
Mendicant Orders would have indignantly thrust aside. It
was the first characteristic of these merciful teachers, that
they could not and would pot dismiss from their minds the
thought of evil which they could not remedy. They
needed not the modern casuistry which takes “ the wide
prevalence of evil in the world as a proof that God cannot
-expect us to harass ourselves incessantly in resisting it.”
To Bishop Copleston it was the most difficult of questions
to determine “ with what degree of evil existing under
our eyes we might fairly indulge a feeling of complacency
and a desire for repose and enjoyment.”* They knew
nothing of repose and enjoyment, for beings who all their
life long must walk on the very verge of hell. They
believed what they professed: and they lived, therefore,
unlike those who are able to dismiss a mere dogma from
their mind. It may be more difficult for the comfort
loving theologians of the present day to explain how it is
that good men on earth rise above the selfishness of heaven.
Teachers of a sterner, if not a better school, find in
the dogma of eternal reprobation the paramount need of
crushing these instinctive or acquired longings for ease and
comfort: and as long as the penalty is regarded solely with
reference to ourselves, it serves most effectually to point
the warning and enforce the lesson. If the whole proba
tion of the sons of men is bounded to their life on earth,
then it is indeed fitting that our days here should know
nothing’ of feasts and merriment. If things go smoothly
with us, it is our business to make them go roughly. The
philosophy of Amasis and Poly crates is fully justified by
the conditions of the Christian’s life ;t and they who accept
these conditions, must feel it in truth a very small part of
their duty not to let the whole year go round “ without a
break and interruption in its circle of pleasures.The
case is altered when, from ourselves, we look on others;
* Bishop Copleston’s philosophy was probably right. It assumes the
aspect of a frightful apathy only when taken along with the dogma of end
less punishment, which there is no evidence that he did not hold.
f Newman’s Parochial Sermons. Vol. VI, Serra. 2, p. 27.
J Ibid.
�28
Eternal Punishment.
and it presents difficulties yet more grave when we come
to dwell on the method of Divine Government itself. In
some way or other the Justice of God who appoints an end
less torment for all who die with any sin not repented of,
must be consistent with an order of things in which
the time of trial may be cut short by an accident. If
natural feeling struggles against the' idea of an infinite
penalty for the sin of a mortal life, it demands still more
imperatively that, in such case, all should have the same
amount of trial. But the child is cut off at school; the old
man lives to heed or disregard warnings repeated through
the life time, perhaps, of three generations. Kay, the sloth
or thoughtlessness of mortal man may be the whole cause
which determines the endless torture of the unbaptised
*
infant.
Some live until they appear to love evil for
its own sake; others are cast into the lake of fire,
when, as theologians admit, they were all but fit for
heaven. The moment of death changes all alike into
beings of unqualified evil.
The loss of some is as
nothing compared with that of others ; and the doom may
come after a thousand warnings, or without any. Yet the
theology which maintains all this insists also that God is
infinitely merciful and loving. It must, at the least, be
admitted that, if in spite of all authority, they who
profess to believe these dogmas have to overcome a
natural repugnance, some among them at least have in this
task achieved no mean success. But they have to persuade
others to accept their own convictions. The decrees of
Councils, or the language of Canons and Articles, may suffice
for themselves ; but some attempt must be made to show
that their belief is enforced by passages of the Old
Testament or the New which seem to make against it.
Men do not at the first glance see how an endless punish
ment for all can be consistent with the few and the many
stripes, how others can suffer torments less tolerable than
those appointed for the men of Sodom and Gomorrha, if
* The theology of Augustine was almost more uncompromising. An
unbaptised infant lay sick: a convert, sincerely penitent, desired baptism on
his deathbed. The priest, when summoned, was asleep or at dinner, or he
would not go. It was the result of a Divine Decree that the child and the
convert should be damned.
f Colenso on Romans, p. 211.
�Eternal Punishment.
29
it be impossible to conceive of any increase to the latter.
If hell is the habitation of no human affections, it is hard to
understand why the rich man in Hades should appear to
be changed for the better rather than the worse. The
necessities of a theological position have provided the
solution; but the firmest believer would probably admit
that it will not generally suggest itself to the natural mind.
To men who have not received a higher illumination, the
rich man appears to be represented not as blaspheming or
even murmuring, not as hating God or exulting in the
ruin of others, but as anxious ’ that his brothers may
not fail to win the blessings which he has lost. To
such it would seem that our Lord assumed “ that even
in the place of torment there will be loving, tender
thoughts in a brother’s heartand they may be tempted
to reason further, that “ if there can be such, as they can
not come from the Spirit of Evil, they must be believed to
come from the Spirit of all Goodness. While there is life,
there is hope. In fact, the rich man is represented as less
selfish in the flames of hell than he was in this life. The
Eternal Fire has already wrought some good result in
him.”* But they who maintain the dogma of endless ven
geance can afford to look down on notions so crude as
these ; rather they feel it their duty to insinuate that none
but men of unclean lives can ever entertain them. To
them the prayer of the rich man to Abraham is simply the
blasphemous expression of a desperate irony, while his life
on earth was the result and token of a conscious and
definite unbelief in the existence of an unseen world.
During his mortal life he may have been sinful; now he is
*
utterly fiendish and diabolical. The teaching of the Bishop
of Oxford seems to involve conclusions not quite consistent
with these positions of the Archbishop of Dublin,f yet both
assert strenuously the endlessness of future punishment.
The former may countenance the notion that the greater
sin has the lesser penalty ; the latter appears to set aside
the ordinary meaning of words.
According to Dr Trench, the narrative was aimed
* Colenso on Romans, p. 214.
f Notes on the Parables, p. 454, &c. &c.
�30
Eternal Punishment.
against the Pharisees, and especially at their unbelief.
The rich man, or, if we must so call him, Dives, had fairly
brought himself to believe that the unseen world had really
no existence, and he calmly adopted and.clung to a course
of life consistently springing out of this cool intellectual
*
conviction.
The discovery of its reality, he made only
when it was too late. It may be. so; but the statement
seems to involve the conclusion that men cannot act as the.
rich man acted, with a clear knowledge of the consequences.
Yet the drunkard deliberately persists in his habit, knowing
not only that sobriety is a duty, but that his vice is ruinous
alike to his body and his soul. The settled purpose to
commit sin may coexist with a keen perception of the
misery of sin. Men may be, as Bishop Butler has insisted,
most unselfish in their viciousness, most disinterested in
deliberately putting aside what they know to be their
highest good.f The rich man in the parable may have acted
like Balaam ; but to assert that his unbelief arose from his
mental process of examination and rejection is as much an
assumption as the ascription to him of some human feeling
can possibly be. We are not told that his actions were
prompted by his belief; it is not implied that he knew any
thing about the beggar who lay sick at his gate ; and many
have fastened on his ignorance as conveying the most
fearful of all warnings to the thoughtless.^ The narrative
seems to represent him simply as putting aside the thought
of all responsibility, not as going through a mental process
in order that he may deny its existence, or as persevering
in the process until he has worked himself into full convic
tion. If it is not easy to see how a parable addressed
chiefly to Pharisees should dwell on extravagance rather
than covetousness, it is still more strange that an intel
lectual unbelief in an unseen world should be attributed to
men who believed a resurrection both angel and spirit.
But a closer scrutiny of the narrative will be rewarded
with further discoveries. It may teach us that the rich
man’s good things were “ good actions or good qualities
• Trench on the Parables, p. 456.
+ Sermon on the Character of Balaam.
j See especially Cope and Stretton, Visitatio Infirmorum, Office for a
careless sick person.
�Eternal Punishment,
3®
which, in some small measure, Dives possessed, and for
which he received in this life his reward.”* Dr Trench is
not prepared to reject the belief of Bishop Sanderson, that
“ God rewardeth those few good things which are in evil
men with these temporal benefits, for whom, yet in his
justice, he reserveth eternal damnation.” Bor nine days
Eblis feasted in his hall the beings who had bidden adieu
to hope ;f it was reserved for a Christian theologian to assert
that God bestows the means of a little sensual enjoyment
for the good qualities or deeds of the unconverted. If Dr
Newman urges sinners during Lent “ to act at least like the
prosperous heathen, who threw his choicest trinket into the
water that he might propitiate fortune,the Archbishop
of Dublin has been taught that “ the course of an unbroken
prosperity is ever a sign and augury of ultimate reproba
tion.” Doubtless the heart knows its own bitterness, and
there may be many breaks in a life of outwardly uninter
rupted success; but Dr Trench’s axiom might afford a
grim satisfaction to those who, in the midst of want and
wretchedness, regard the rich and the powerful as
unquestionably in the enjoyment of “ unbroken prosperity.”
There are probably not wanting those who may think that
this dangerous condition is fulfilled in Archbishop Trench
himself.
When a writer lays down such a criterion on his own
authority, it is hard to abstain from retorts and insinuations:
but the mere sense of truth and fairness must sometimes
call on us to speak, when we might have chosen rather to
keep silence. If Dr Trench is at a pinch to explain how
the sight of the lost, whom they are not suffered to help,
can fail to cast a shade on the happiness of the blessed, it
is simply because he has not availed himself of the ready
solution of his predecessor, Dr Whately. When he asserts
that the rich man’s request to Abraham is “ a bitter reproach
against God and against the old economy,” it might be
enough to reply that the narrative does not say so. But
the case is altered when Dr Trench proceeds to judge of
* Trench on the Parables, p. 474.
f Beckford’s Vathek.
$ Sermons, Vol. VI, p. 27. Dr Newman should rather have said
“ appease the jealousy of God <j>0ovep'ov to baip.oviov was the keynote of the
philosophy of Herodotus.
�32
Eternal Punishment.
the inward life of those who differ from himself. He has
a keen perception that, if suffering was already doing- its
work in the rich man, sufferings must be not “ vindicative,”
but “ corrective.” Such a doctrine, he believes, “ will
always find favour with all those who have no deep insight
into the evil of sin, no earnest view of the task and
responsibilities of life, especially when, as too often,
they are bribed to hold it by a personal interest, by
a lurking consciousness that they themselves are not
earnestly striving to enter in at the strait gate, that their
own standing in Christ is insecure or none.”* Dr Trench
is,' of course, not obliged to believe or to assert that such a
fear lies at the root of the convictions expressed by Mr
Maurice, or Mr Wilson, or the Bishop of Natal; but he
does most distinctly and unequivocally deny to them “ any
deep insight into the evil of sin, any earnest view of the
task and responsibilities of life.” The verdict of Dr Trench
might fairly justify us in rejecting the criterion that a tree
is known bv its fruits, or in questioning the truth that
charity thinks no evil. He seems to agree with Aquinas
that while the rich man asked that his brethren might not
come into his place of torment he was really longing for
their damnation. If his request was nothing but a blas
phemous scoff, Dr Trench can hardly think otherwise.
Yet surely he could not have alleged this opinion of Aquinas;
except from the mere necessity of maintaining a foregone
conclusion. It is impossible to conceive of a condition of
heart more thoroughly diabolical. In short, the being who
can indulge in such a wish must be wholly and intensely
bad. But absolute iniquity shuts out the idea of remorse,
and leaves no room for any suffering except that which is
physical, or any mental feelings except those of violent and
furious rage ; and these leave no place for that aching void,
that unavailing agony of sorrow for a good irrecoverably
lost, which is generally asserted to be the special sting in
the misery of the wicked. Nay, more; this idea that all
men become devils in hell, wild in their own unbounded
wickedness, alone constitutes the logical necessity for the
physical tortures of fire and brimstone, as well as for the
* Notes on the Parables, p. 478.
�Eternal Punishment.
agency of demons to inflict those outward stripes for which
only, on this hypothesis, any feeling will be left.
This logical necessity was clearly present to the mind
of Bishop Pearson. If it was certain that the pains of hell
were simply vindictive, and the same measure of endless
duration was the portion of all the lost, then the punish
ment of sinners must be regarded as something different
from the righteous wrath of God against all sin. If the
punishment was endless, the wicked must live through
endless time to suffer it. “ Otherwise there would be a
punishment inflicted and none endured, which is a contra
diction.”* Bishop Pearson had a quick eye for the incon
sistencies of his opponents ; on his own side he can see
none. He is careful to assert that punishment shall be
strictly apportioned to sin, “ so that no man shall suffer
more than he hath deserved.”f He insists also that they
shall be “ tormented with a pain of loss, the loss from God,
from whose presence they are cast out, the pain from them
selves in a despair of enjoying Him, and regret for losing
Him.” Modern theology has substituted a savage delight
in tormenting each other in place of this endless remorse.
Bishop Pearson was scarcely concerned with examining an
idea which probably never entered his mind. But the diffi
culty involved in the enormous differences between one man
and another at the time of death, belongs to all ages and
countries alike. Bishop Pearson knew, as the Bishop of
Oxford knows now, that young children have died in sin.
It is cowardly to evade the irresistible conclusion. The
little children are doomed, not less than the Devil himself,
to a punishment which “ shall not be taken off them by any
compassion.” These, the sinners of a day, whose sins lay
in playing truant and telling a lie to hide it, shall no more
than the great Tempter of Mankind .live to pay the utter
most farthing. They, not less than Herod or Alexander
VI., or Agathocles or Danton (it matters not whom we
take), shall suffer the endless “ horror of despair,” because
“ it were not perfect hell if any hope could lodge in it.” It
needs some special illumination to enable ordinary men to
see how these children suffer no more than they deserve.
* Pearson on the Creed, Art. xii., p. 463.
f lb., p. 467.
D
�34
Eternal Punishment.
The time has come when the whole subject must be
met calmly and fearlessly. There may be sophistry and
evasion on both sides. Orthodox theologians have not
withheld both these imputations from Mr Maurice, whose
worst fault is an indistinctness of expression which some
times assumes an air of paradox. Something’ of this
ambiguity lies at the root of his reluctance to extend the
idea of time into that of eternity. It may be true that
“ the continual experiments to heap hundreds of thousands
of years on hundreds of thousands of years,” do not
put us even on the way to the idea; but it seems
not less certain that we cannot conceive of existence
except as an extension of duration.
*
It is better to
say plainly and honestly that the idea of any end to the
life of the righteous involves also the idea of the most dis
interested injustice,—an injustice the more horrible in pro
portion to the greater advance of the good in conformity
to the Divine will. It is well to say not less honestly that
the idea of an end to the misery of the wicked involves no
such imputation, if at the same time it is maintained that
so long as there remains any resistance, so long must the
sinner abide under the burning wrath of God. Án infinite
resistance implies an infinite chastisement; nor can we
allege anything to prove that the wicked cannot prolong
their resistance for ever, except the difficulty of believing
that the Divine Will cannot finally subdue the disobedience
of every enemy.f Nor is it of much use to dwell on verbal
arguments drawn from the words which in our English
Bibles are represented by everlasting punishment and the
unquenchable fire. J But it is more than ever necessary to
* Christian Berrem' rancer, January 1854, p. 225. Art., Maurice’s Theo
logical Essays. This article presents the arguments for the doctrine of
endless punishments with perhaps as much force as they can be expressed ;
but the reviewer was apparently mistaken in thinking that Mr Maurice’s
main objections were merely verbal.
f It was this difficulty which led Scotns Erigena to affirm the final
restoration of the Devil himself, and to cite Origen and others in support of
this belief.—See Milman’s Latin Christianity, Book xiv., ch. 2.
J Probably not much will be gained by efforts to determine whether
the writers of the New Testament attached a distinct idea of duration to
the word anários, which, as coming from the root i, to go, originally ex
pressed the simple idea of motion. It is of the utmost importance to bear in
mind th:s first restricted and sensuous meaning of the word. (See Max
Müller, Lectures on the .Science of Language, Second Series, pp. 67, 249,
�Eternal Punishment.
35
meet assumptions by plain denials. Bishop Pearson may
rest his own belief on the fact that the same adjective is
applied in the Greek Testament to the state of the wicked
and the good; but it becomes a mere question of fact, to be
determined manifestly by each man’s judgment, when it is
asserted that the texts of Scripture declaring the endless
punishment of the wicked “ are so decisive and plain, that
they must be taken to mean what they appear to do, unless
some positive ground of reason or morals can be shown against
it.”* Such ground can be shown, and a man must indeed
have thrown dust into his own eyes, if he can think that a
sweeping assertion can put aside the distinction of the few
and the many stripes, of the more tolerable punishment of
Gomorrha than of Capernaum, of the fire which is to save
the men whose work of hay or stubble it shall nevertheless
consume. It is a profound casuistry which sees nothingbut diabolical blasphemy and rage in what is admitted to
be the only full picture given in the Gospels of the state of
the impenitent after death. One or two phrases of the
New Testament at the most may be wrested into the asser
tion that all those who die impenitent are tormented for
ever ; a far greater number appear altogether to contradict
it, and these must be taken to mean what they appear to
rnean, “ unless some positive ground of morals or reason can
be shown against it.” Morals and reason would appear to be
decisive against a dogma which issues in a labyrinth of in
explicable and almost ludicrous contradictions, and which
seems to impute to the Merciful God an intensity of vindic
tiveness which the human mind is utterly unable to realise.
But it is asserted that reason and morals call for the
maintenance of this dogma from another point of view.
It is urged that “ the release from the notion of Eternal
Punishment would be felt by the great mass as a relief
336, 527.) But it may be more tempting to lay a stress on the word
KÓAatris, which, according to Aristotle, is essentially temporary, end to
maintain that the English translators were not warranted in rendeiing
7rdp &(ri3e<rTov by fire that never shall be quenched. The verbal adjective
can at best express mere quality or capacity. But it seems idle to apply
such subtleties to the Greek of the New Testament. If it were not so, .
something might be made of the term fiicravos., as applied to sickness and
plagues; but it seems to be used precisely as we use the word trial without
reference to any intended effect on the sufferer.
* Christian Remembrancer, January 1854, p. 225.
�36
Eternal Punishment.
from the sense of moral obligation, and, relying on the
certainty that all would be sure to be right at last, men
would run the risk of the intermediate punishment, what
ever it might be, and plunge into self-indulgence without
hesitation.”* The reviewer of Mr Maurice knew of course
that men do so now in spite of this doctrine, and further
“ that there is no limit to the powers of imagination by
which men can suppress the reasonable certainty of the
future, and make the present everything.” But he thinks
that “ the belief in endless punishment is the true and
rational concomitant of the sense of moral obligation ”
and that “ a general relaxation of moral ties, a proclama
tion of liberty and security, the audacity of sins which had
before been abashed, carelessness where there had been
hesitation, obstinacy where there had been faltering, and
defiance where there had been fear, would show a world in
which the sanctions of morality and religion had been
loosened, and in which vice had lost a controlling power,
and got rid of an antagonist and a memento.”f It is im
possible to regard with indifference the least possible risk of
weakening the sense of moral obligation; but it is a mere
question of fact, and human experience may carry us some
little way towards deciding it. Men are, undoubtedly, able
to suppress the reasonable certainty of the future ; but they
are also able to heap sin on sin in spite of a penalty of
which they have almost an ever present dread. Hell is
emphatically the Italian’s bugbear. The Englishman can
talk about it, and dismiss it from his mind; but it haunts
the Italian by day and by night. His flesh creeps and
his blood runs cold in the silence of his secret chamber,
and the first temptation which crosses his path is followed
by his submission. But there are more sweeping methods
of evading this belief. The Church of Rome modifies the
dogma by the purgatorial fire: the popular belief of Pro
testants dispenses with purgatory altogether, and sends all
men practically to heaven. At the least, it answers the
question, whether there are few saved, by the implied
assertion that very few, indeed, are lost. Hence the belief
in endless punishment may be the rational concomitant of
* Christian Remembrancer, January 1854, p. 233.
f Christian Remembrancer, lb. p. 234.
�Eternal Punishment.
37
a sense of moral obligation; but its effects are practically
nullified, and its removal would only widen a little more
the road which is now held to lead to heaven those who
live the common life of all men.
*
Dean Milman admits
that there is a natural revolt against the doctrine: men
wish to evade it, and they consolidate their sophistry into
a system. None, or at the most but few, really maintain
now that all who do not die in the active Love of God
remain for ever face to face with His Anger. There would
be no such scruple in believing- that in all, without respect
of persons, the Eternal Eire will continue to purge away
the dross from the pure ore as long as any dross remains.
The check on sin would be increased in power, and the
sense of moral obligation quickened, because it would be
set free from a belief which to natural human instinct
appears self-contradictory and immoral.
But what is the experience of legislators in all ages and
countries ? If men will not be deterred by any penalty
short of endless damnation, that is to say, a penalty than,
which they can conceive none higher, then clearly all
apportionment of civil punishment must merge in the
one penalty of death. The idea is a very old one ; but,
whether in England or at Athens, it has simply defeated its
own ends, if that end be the diminution of crimes. Diodotos warned the Athenians that they might punish all
their enemies with death, but they would only induce them
still more to run the chances of escape.f The same
gambling spirit runs into things spiritual. The same
doctrine which tells the good man that if he dies with any
sin not repented of he will sink into hell still leaves it
possible that the wicked man may live to repent. Thou
sands believe with Balaam that the mere wish to die thedeath of the righteous man will somehow or other issue in
its fulfilment.
There remains yet the fact, which it is impossible to
ignore, that the mitigation of a penalty is not necessarily
followed by the multiplication of the offences for which it
is inflicted. When Cleon proposed to punish the revolted
Mitylenteans by an indiscriminate massacre of all the men,
* Jowett on the Epistle to the Romans, Vol. I, n. 417, &c.
t Thucydides, iii. 45.
�38
Eternal Punishment.
he was carrying out a theory of punishment which seems
to have been heartily accepted by Archbishop Whately. In
his belief, as in that of the Athenian demagogue, “the
object proposed by human punishment is the prevention of
future crimes by holding out a terror to transgressors.”*
Both alike put a part for the whole ; and, if the theory
were true, it would relieve judges from all duty of appor
tioning punishments for offences. English judges of the
present day feel this task of apportionment more and more
to be a very strict duty; and it would seem that people do
not steal more sheep and handkerchiefs because they
no longer run the risk of being hanged for the crime.
Undoubtedly, if there is but the one penalty of death for
almost all offences, the task of legislation is wonderfully
simplified. It implies no exalted idea of Divine justice if
we believe that its penalties are fixed by the same kind of
vindictive indolence. The legislation of England is more
and more making the reformation of the offender a co
ordinate object with the prevention of crime. According
to the popular theology, it has already risen to a higher idea
than is exhibited in the Justice of an all-merciful God.
SECTION III.
Philosophical Arguments alleged in Defence
Dogma of Endless Punishment.
of the
But from the contradictory theories and notions of popular
preachers and commentators, or even from the positive state
ments of Creeds, Articles, and Canons, we may pass into the
calmer regions of philosophical argument. The conditions
of our life here may teach us something about that which
shall be hereafter: and, if we believe that one and the same
God rules over all worlds, it is impossible to ignore and
foolish to depreciate the force of this argument from analogy.
But the name even of Bishop Butler must not tempt us to
* Scripture Revelations of a Future State, p. 219.
�Eternal Punishment.
39
draw a single inference which it does not fully warrant.
Every question connected with or arising out of it is, as
Butler liimself admits, a mere question of fact. We may or
may not be able to determine it; but on those which we fail
to answer we must be content to suspend all judgment. It
matters little whether Butler took a high or a low view of
religion ; but it can never be useless to show, if it can be
shown, that he lias in any instance overstepped the bounds
which must be set to all reasoning from analogy. The
most stringent scrutiny is needed to ensure that the alleged
dogmas of revealed religion shall not draw from the con
ceptions of natural religion an aid which the latter cannot
logically afford. If the argument is to carry any weight as
addressed to unbelievers, this rigid indifference becomes
an indispensable duty.
The Analogy of Butler may be as wearisome as a long
journey through deep sand; and we may miss in it “not
only distinct philosophical conceptions but a scientific use
of terms.”* It is of more moment to remark that the
science of the Analogy does not altogether harmonize with
the science of the great Sermons which have done more to
preserve his fame. The account given in the latter of
human nature may appear to allow but little scope for a
fervent or an ecstatic piety; but it asserts unequivocally
that the happiness or the misery of man is the direct and
inseparable result of his actions and his habits. Man stands
in an immediate relation to his Maker, not merely as being
the work of His hands, but as possessing affections and
desires which can have their complete satisfaction in
nothing less than God Himself. His work is to see that
the several parts of his nature are kept in due proportion
to each other, as well as in subordination to that higher
principle of reflexion which ought to be absolute in power
as it is supreme in authority. And throughout it follows,
that by the very necessity of His Nature, God, who cannot
■change, must regard with love every creature which seeks
so to conform its will to the Divine will, must acknowledge
them and draw them towards Himself, in proportion as they
thus strive to do their proper work. Hence the final cause
* Essays and Reviews. Ninth Edition, p. 293.
�4o
Eternal Punishment.
of man is conformity with absolute Righteousness and
unfailing Love. This conformity may also involve his hap
piness, but in the order of ideas it precedes it.
The Analogy introduces us to views of a very different
kind. In the Sermons the constitution of man involves
the need of conformity with the Divine Nature: in the
Analogy God annexes certain results to certain acts. In the
former Virtue is the natural condition of man,—implying
a necessary communion with the Source of all Truth and
Goodness : in the latter it is something which God has
promised to reward and which may yield to its pos
sessor a “ secret satisfaction and sense of security.” In
the Sermons the Love of God is represented as the
direct and necessary complement of human nature; in
the Analogy the idea of God as a master and governor is
the first to occupy the mind of man. In the formcr by
the very necessity of His Nature, God loves the creatures
whom he has made capable of being kindled by his Love ; in
the latter “ the true notion, or conception of the Author of
nature is that of a master or governor prior to the consi
deration of his moral attribute.”* The whole method of
Divine government becomes a complex machinery, admi
rably adapted, it may be, for its special purpose, but imply
ing the exercise of an arbitrary will which has prede
termined certain results without reference to an Eternal
and Unchangeable Law.f The Sermons speak of the con
stitution of a man as flowing directly from the nature of
God; the Analogy seems rather to separate the goodness of
virtuous men from the goodness of God, and to make
them independent centres of righteousness. Erom the
Sermons it follows, of necessity, that the end of human
life is not happiness but a conformity to the Divine
Nature; in the Analogy we are taught that God has
* Butler’s Analogy. Part I, ch. ii., p. 3S.
t It is as well to remember how rapidly this recognition of power as the
basis of the Divine nature may pass into a mere Baal worship. Congrega
tions have not unfrequentlv been edified and comforted by the assurance that
they .are in the hands of an all-powerful Being who happens also to be verv
merciful, and by the contrast of their fortunate position with the conceiv
able wretchedness of creatures made bjr a Deity whose delight lay simply
in tormenting them. Such talk might be dismissed at once, except as illus
trating the sort of argument which is sometimes used to reconcile the idea
of mercy with that ot an endless punishment of all sinners.
�Eternal Punishment.
4i
annexed pleasure to some actions and pain to others, and
that men “ act altogether on an apprehension of avoid
ing’ evil or obtaining good.” To use Butler’s favourite
phrase, God governs the world by a system of rewards
and punishments ; and apart from any dogmas of revealed
*
religion this conclusion is forced upon us by the analogy
of civil government.
Many probably, when they read that “ the annexing
pleasure to some actions and pain to others in our power
to do or forbear, and giving notice of this appointment
beforehand to those whom it concerns, is the proper formal
notion of government,” t will wonder whence Butler derived
his knowledge. That English legislation in his day was
not slow in inflicting pain for a vast number of actions, few
would care to deny ; it would not be so easy to give a list
of actions to which it annexed a feeling of pleasure. But
to what code of any age or people could this axiom ever bo
applied ? A paternal despotism in its palmiest days might
possibly exhibit some faint approach to such a system; but
otherwise human law contents itself mainly with pro
tecting persons and property and inflicting pains or penal
ties on those who injure either the one or the other. It is
careful to punish whatever it holds to be an offence; it
admits no obligation to reward all that men may regard as
generous or honourable. The very idea of equal govern
ment is, that it leaves good citizenship to be its own
reward, while it showers its rewards on a few, not because
they are better or more righteous than their neighbours,
but because they have had it in their power by whatever
means to do the state more service. It expects all citizens
to do their duty, without even telling them that they ought
* The Reviewer of Mr Maurice’s “Theological Essays” in the
‘ Christian Remembrancer,’ Jan. 1854, p. 209, earnestly denies that “analogy
is Butler’s primary argument for the truth of religion.” This is, of course,
quite true, if the Sermons and. the Analogy are taken together. Then,
undoubtedly his full system is grounded “ on an appeal to our consciousness
of a certain moral nature within us in the first place,” and “an immediate
inference from that moral nature in the next.” But the Analogy is pro
fessedly addressed to those who do not admit this consciousness of a certain
moral nature ; and for the time the argument from Analogy becomes his
primary argument. The result is a contradiction between the system
propounded in the Analogy and the Sermons.
t Analogy. Part I, ch. ii., p. 37.
�42
Eternal Punishment.
to feel pleasure in doing it, and certainly without caring
whether they feel the pleasure, or whether they do not.
The Athenian rose to a higher idea when he obeyed the
laws of his country, not because they might reward him
or give him pleasure, but from a simple sense of duty,
which rested neither on punishment nor reward. To lay a
special stress on these was at once the evidence of a mind
more or less degraded. Men of slavish natures might be
guided by pleasure and pain, and if they broke the law
might be chastised by those pains which are directly con
trary to the pleasures which they lose. The formal notion
*
of government was with Pericles something very different
from this.
It may, of course, be said that good citizenship must
bring pleasure ; but it does so by no appointment of human
law, and thus far the analogy is not conclusive. Still there
remains the general course of earthly things ; and to Butler
the popular belief of endless reprobation, perhaps, appeared
to be warranted by the physical effects of wickedness in
this life. A careful survey of them taught him that there
was no apparent proportion between the sin and its conse
quences, that the latter are frequently delayed till long
after the actions which occasioned them are forgotten, and
that after such delay they come “ not by degrees but
suddenly, with violence and at once.” It taught him that,
though after a certain amount of folly, it was often in the
power of men to retrieve their affairs, or recover their
health and character, yet real reformation was in many
cases of no avail towards preventing the miseries, sickness,
and infamy, annexed to folly and extravagance beyond that
degree. It further showed him (and on this he laid a still
greater stress) that “ neglects from inconsiderateness,
want of attention, not looking about us to see what we
have to do, are often attended with consequences altogether
as dreadful as any active misbehaviour from the most
extravagant passion.” There is something specious in the
supposed analogy ; but neglect and want of attention may
arise, and very often do arise, as much from weak mental
power as from an ill-regulated life; and their ill effects are
* Aristotle, Etbic. Nicom. X, 9,10. This great thinker expressly affirms
human punishment to be a process of healing, lb. II, 2, 4.
�Eternal Punishment.
43
quite as disastrous in the fomer case as in the latter. But
while the latter is morally worse as well as unfortunate,
we cannot assert this of the other. The results in this case
are external or physical, and will cease to affect the man
as soon as he is removed into a different condition of things.
Even with the other, some distinction must be drawn
between the will of the sinner and the physical conse
quences of his sin. The struggle of the will may begin
when the body has lost the power of obeying it. The
effects of intemperance last much longer than the seasons
of drunkenness ; and may be first felt in all their horrors
when the body has lost the power of resistance. The widest
inference from this cannot warrant the belief that these exter
nal results will be carried into a life which will not be physi
cal. We may feel absolutely certain that the opium-eater can
never regain a healthy condition of body ; but we cannot
deny that his will might at once begin to act effectually, if
the physical derangement in the lining- of his stomach were
*
removed.
The reason of the thing- can never prove that
the bodily misery so produced must accompany a man into
his future life. The physical results of sin may have been
on earth irremediable ; but Butler has allowed that many
who yet suffer them are reaKy penitent. At the utmost w
e
*
cannot, on the grounds of such analogy, deny that the
incapable will of the drunkard may recover its power when
the physical impediment has been removed ; and we cannot
possibly prove that it may not be removed by death.
From the analogy of the present order of things, Butler
passes to the sentiments of heathen writers on the subject
of future punishment. This subject, he rightly insists,
belongs most evidently to natural religion ; but he adds at
the same time that, “ Gentile writers, both moralists and
poets, speak of the future punishment of the wicked, both
as to the duration and degree of it, in a like manner of
expression and description as the Scripture does.”f It is
hard to deal with a sentence which, with a hundred others,
proves how little Butler aimed at “ a scientific use of terms.”
* Archdeacon Hare, in his “Mission of the Comforter,” refers to this
belief of Coleridge, that the loss of power in the will may be the punish
ment of such vices.
f Analogy. Part I, ch. ii., p. 42. Note.
�44
Eternal Punishment.
He has left us well-nigh to guess the meaning which he
attached to Scripture, Revelation, and Religion. The first
may mean a part of the Old and New Testament, or the
whole ; the second appears sometimes to mean the Bible,
sometimes a supposed communication made to Adam before
the fall or after it; the third is used to express sometimes the
law of God written on a man’s heart, and at others to mean
nothing more than the declarations of a particular book in
the Bible. But on the subject of future punishment it
seems useless to allege any argument in the statements of
heathen writers (supposing that all these had spoken alike)
with the statements of Scripture, when these are held by
antagonistic theological schools to prove directly opposite
conclusions. If, however, it be meant that Gentile writers
as a body maintain the endless punishment of all sinners
without reference to the measure of their sin, the statement
is not true.
*
The belief of almost all was at the best
shadowy and vague enough. Not a few refused to extend
their thought to any life beyond the present, or, if at times
they suffered their minds to rest upon it, it was to doubt
whether any but the noblest souls would be allowed to live
at all.f A still smaller number spoke out more clearly, but
it is impossible to wrest their words in support of the doc
trine of Bishop Pearson. Socrates does, indeed, draw a
distinction between pardonable and unpardonable sins, or
rather between sins which can and those which cannot be
healed; J but they who have committed the former are
purified without reference to their repentance before death.
It is the magnitude of the sin, not the disposition of the
sinner, which shuts him out from all hope of recovery.
But the class of sinners who are not benefited by their
sufferings is manifestly a very small one. It does not take
in the lying or dishonest little child, it pointedly excludes
* Due stress must be laid on the vast numbers among the heathen who
accepted the doctrines of Epicurus; and the full extent to which these
doctrines were carried is well shown in the fragments of Philodemus,
recently recovered amongst the Herculanean Papyri.—See the ‘ Edinburgh
Review,’ October 1862, page 346.
f “ Si non cum corpore extinguuntur magnae animre.’’ The doubting
hope of Tacitus was far too general not to weaken greatly the force of
Butler’s argument.
t icGma agapr^gara. Plato. Gorg. lxxxi.
�Eternal Punishment.
45
those who lead the common life of all men, it rejects those
■whom Dante would only not have thrust down into the
lowest dungeons of hell. Tyrants and kings and princes
are amongst them,—Tantalos, Sisyphos, and Tityos; but
the lot of Thersites is the happiest. It seems to be hard,
if not impossible, for a private citizen to enrol himself in
*
the company of transgressors who had sinned beyond all
hope of cure.
The course of human life on earth will show that sins
of the flesh produce physical consequences which may last
indefinitely longer than the time spent in committing them.
Ordinary experience teaches us that actions tend to create
habits, and that habits retain over us a strong and per
manent hold. Human legislation claims to visit certain
acts with pains and penalties, and demands obedience to
Law without promise of recompense or reward. In some
countries it rises to a higher level, and, while more carefully
apportioning punishment, seeks in a greater degree to
reform the offender, and, so far as may be practicable, to
lessen rather than to raise the penalty. There is no analogy
between such a state of things and an endless torment of
all sinners without regard to their spiritual condition.
Such an idea can challenge belief on grounds of authority
alone ; and out of the whole cycle of Christian doctrines it
is the only one which rests wholly on this foundation.-]"
* Socrates is represented as inclining to the latter opinion, ou yap, olpat,
¿iftv aura>. Mr Wilson, in “Essays and Reviews,” p. 206 (9th Ed.), says
that the Greek “ could not expect the reappearance in another world, for
any purpose, of a Thersites or an Hyperbolus.” The words attributed to
Socrates seem to imply not so much that such men are not among the
inhabitants of the other world, as that they are not aviaroi. Hence they
come under the class of men who are benefited by their sufferings ; Tantalos
and Sisyphos represent the few who have sinned too deeply to leave their
torments any purgatorial power.
f If any exception must be made, it would seem to be that of the Fall.
But a denial of the fact that Adam fell leaves the question of a “ taint or
corruption naturally engendered in his offspring,” with all its consequences
just where it was before. The question of the Fall itself leads us into a
mythological inquiry, on which we cannot enter here. Some remarks
bearing on the subject will be found in M. Michel Breaks admirable analysis
of the myth of Hercules and Cacus. Paris: Durand. 1863.
�46
Eternal Punishment.
SECTION IV.
Present State of the Controversy as bearing on the
Position and Duties of the Clergy of the Church
of England.
Hence it is that, in spite of the antagonism of modern
science, in spite of the tacit abandonment of some parts in
the narrative of the Old Testament, in spite of the acknow
ledged hopelessness of defining their limits and the condi
tions of inspiration, the theologians who uphold the
popular belief cling to some theory of inspiration with
greater tenacity, it would seem, than ever. Hence it is
that the Christian world is fast splitting up into two sec
tions,—the one half-tempted to believe itself in antagonism
with Christianity, the other regarding the progress of
modern thought with an alarm alike unreasoning and
useless,—useless, because it is impossible to check the rising
tide,—useless, because the flood which assails a mere tra
ditional teaching does not even threaten the Body of Truth
which is the real inheritance of Christendom,—useless,
because this Truth will shine out with unclouded lustre
when the artificial safeguards of an inconsistent theology
shall have been swept away.
It is, of course, possible for a man to reject and deny
any truth or dogma whatsoever; but it must surely be a
distorted vision which can see a growing tendency in the
present day to set aside the great body of Christian doctrine.
If there is more and more a revolting against theories
which regard Power as the basis of the Divine nature,
there is less reluctance to believe that God is dealing with
men for their good. But if there be any one dogma which
can produce no other sanction than that of authority, it
must undergo the stringent scrutiny of an age, which,
with all its shortcomings and all its sins, is bent on getting
at the truth of facts. Men will not be deterred from
closely sifting every argument which upholds a doctrine at
variance with all natural instincts and affections. They
see that the Clergy, who maintain it, do not really
�Eternal Punishment.
47
believe it, that no one really believes it. They know well
how to distinguish a genuine from a spurious belief. They
know that the time was when men might be said to have
this faith, when the thought of the broad gulf yawning to
receive all sinners heightened their convictions of the
essential impurity of all material things. They know how
that belief displayed itself. Bernard believed it when he
deliberately broke up the home which he loved ; Jerome
believed it when he did battle with the fiends of hell in his
cave at Bethlehem ; Francis of Assisi believed it when he
took poverty for his bride and gathered round him the
hosts which forswore every earthly joy to avoid the flames
of hell. The forms of the Sacrifice might vary ; its essence
was the same. Macarius might plunge himself naked into
a morass and brave the sting of insects which might pierce
the hide of a boar. Simeon on his Pillar might afflict soul
and body with the heat by day and the frost by night; but
in one and all, in proportion to the sincerity of their faith,
there was the same vehement rejection not only of every
earthly pleasure but of everything which could only be termed
not a torment or a plague. The teachers of our day go
about to reconcile their belief in the final ruin of almost
all mankind with a natural love of ease and a feeling of
self-complacency. There is much speaking, and in a few,
at least, some self-sacrifice ; but the curse which they believe
to rest upon the world, rests on it, it would seem, in name
only. It does not lessen their liking for the world’s good
things: it does not break their sleep by night, or
greatly afflict their souls by day. They look on man
kind as on beings of whom few can escape the day
of the great vengeance; but they can mingle still in
the world of science, or trade, or politics, and shape
their words by the dictates of time- serving expediency. In
the eyes of Benedict or Columba or Dominic no further
proofs would be needed of a complete and deliberate unbe
lief. But while some still insist loudly that God cannot
have mercy on men after their pilgrimage here is ended,
while they place in the same fire the lying child and the
pitiless murderer, the greater number are content to speak
in more measured words, and to tell their people that jus
tice is with God the consummation, and not the contra
�48
Eternal Punishment.
diction, of that which is justice with men. It is impossible
to deny that such is becoming more and more the teaching
of the Clergy of the Church of England. The fierce denun
ciations which paralyzed many hearts with terror thirty
years ago are, by comparison, rarely heard now. Preachers
resort less and less to the elaborate dsemonology of Dante
or of Milton ; they instinctively abstain more and more
from any attempts to define the method of future punish
ment. Is it possible to bring together more convincingevidence that the doctrine is not really believed ? Is it
possible to produce a stronger reason why they who know
that these things are so should come forward boldly and
honestly to declare it ?
This age is one of much serious thought, and the
efforts to arrive at truth for the truth’s sake are neither
feeble nor insincere ; but it is not pre-eminently an age of
martyrs or confessors. They who have thought most
deeply and anxiously are conscious that they have passed
through more than one stage of belief and faith ; and they
feel that the change which is coming cannot, on the whole,
be accomplished with the same weapons which fought the
battle of Teutonic against Latin Christianity. No great
experience is needed to show them that others have under
gone, or are undergoing, the like changes. Not a few who
now, if pressed to declare their belief, would assuredly
refuse to accept the Bishop of Oxford’s pictures of hell
torments, received their Orders with an unquestioningacceptance of all Anglican theology. Not a few passed
from this state of temporary repose into a hard struggle
which only did not issue in their submission to the Church
of Rome. The teaching which had impressed on them the
Unity of the Church and the unimaginable fearfulness of
schism, justified and enforced the inquiry which was to
determine whether they were in the right position them
selves. It was of no avail that they led the holiest lives, if
they questioned but one single point in all the faith of
Catholic Christendom; it was of no avail that their faith
and their lives were what they should be, if their belief
was professed and their works done where they ought not
to be done and professed. The rising of a doubt was the
signal for flight, for to doubt and linger and to die in that
�Eternal Punishment.
49
doubt, was to be lost for ever. The Church of Rome was
Catholic, even by the admission of her enemies; her orders
were allowed to be valid; her dogmas retained the faith of
the Church in all ages, although they may have overlaid it.
She could offer them security, and security was everything
under a state of things in which the accident of a moment
might remove the Christian beyond the reach of hope and
mercy. It was hard to escape from these doubts and fears
without casting aside the burden of sacerdotalism. It was
hardly possible to remain withodt the pale of Rome, while
the paramount necessity of Catholic Communion seemed to
thrust aside every other; but it was easy to emerge from
these mortal fears into the belief in a Divine kingdom
embracing all ages and all lands, into a belief which did
not dare to limit the mercy of God, which cared little to
speak of virtue and vice, of punishments and rewards, but
which placed the salvation of man in the conformity of his
will to the Divine will, in a constant dependence on his
Love and Grace.
Such as this has been the history of many an English
Clergyman during the last ten or twenty years. They may
pass now by many names; they may be regarded by the
world as belonging to the High Church or the Broad
Church, but they who search such matters closely may see
that the foundation of their faith is laid on the conscious
conviction of a moral government of Righteousness, Truth,
and Justice, as men with all their wickedness construe and
accept those terms. It is impossible not to see whither
these things are tending; it is mere hypocrisy to pretend
that we do not perceive it. The sentences of Ecclesiastical
Courts may possibly arrest, but they cannot turn back the
course of modern thought. They do not profess to concern
themselves with the Truth as such ; and the truth as such
is the one end and aim to which every channel of science
and research is converging.
And, finally, the charge to such of the Clergy as hold a
faith like this to quit their posts and set up some new sect
will fall on unheeding ears. Why should they abandon a
Church in the body of whose teaching their faith is deeper
than ever, why yield up the posts entrusted to their charge
because some choose to determine what the Church has left
�5°
Eternal Punishment.
undefined ? Why should they leave the centime of all happy
memories and all bright hopes when nowhere else can they
look to find the same peace and consolation ? Why should
the Bishop of Natal desert the Christian and the heathen
Zulus, for whom and among whom he has so long laboured
heartily and earnestly, because he will not and cannot
propound to them a dogma which makes the assertion of
Perfect Righteousness an unintelligible riddle ? Why
should he cease from the holy work of relieving from their
sadness the souls whom God had not made sad ? Why
should he not assure the trembling convert that his parents
are not thrust down into the lowest pit of hell simply
because they happened to die before the missionary came ? *
Why should he not go on to do his duty by entering his
most solemn protest against falsehoods which are “ utterly
contrary to the whole spirit of the Gospel,” and which
operate “ with most injurious and deadening effect both
on those who teach and on those who are taught” ? Plainly
he would be acting wrong were he not to do so. The
Church of England has accepted the task of preaching a
Gospel, nor can any say that she has wholly failed in
preaching it.
The judgment of the Court of Arches in the case of
Mr Wilson would, even if final, have availed little or
nothing on the other side. Dr Lushington insisted, in the
clearest language, that he was concerned not with the truth
of doctrines, but simply with the fact whether they are or
are not maintained by the Church of England. He accepted
the rule laid down in the Gorham case that “ if the Articles
of Religion are silent upon a point of doctrine, then, unless
the Rubrics and Formularies clearly and distinctly deter
mine it, it is open for each member of the Church to decide
for himself according to his own conscientious opinion.”
No one can assert that he wilfully narrowed the terms of
communion ; some may think that he has suggested evasions
even greater than any which had been acted on before. As
*
long as it is not in plain terms denied that the Holy Scrip
tures contain all things necessary to salvation, any one
* The Bishop of Natal cites a forcible instance of such teaching. Com
mentary on Epistle to the Romans, p. 211.
�Eternal Punishment.
5i
might affirm that not a single book was written by the man
whose name it bears, or even at the time and place to
which it has been assigned. He might interpret figurative
language as historical; he might resolve statements of
facts into a transcendental mysticism. The judge was not
concerned with questions of interpretation. He demanded
no more than the admission that the books, or at least
some part or parts of each book, were written “under
Divine guidance.” He was ready to concede all liberty, if
only the plain, literal, and grammatical sense of authoritative
formularies was not contravened. So far as regards the
doctrine of Eternal Punishment, they who deny that it is
of necessity endless for those who undergo it might most
honestly have accepted the issue.
It may, of course, be said that nothing more than an
accident enables the Bishop of Natal, or Mr Wilson, or Mr
Maurice to accept these words of the Athanasian Creed in
their plain, literal, and grammatical meaning. It may be
urged that the author of that creed meant something very
different, and that it is mere evasion, if they maintain their
ground in the Church of England on a mere superficial
agreement like this. It may be so. Yet it is an evasion
not so great as those which Dr Lushington has deliberately
allowed on the subject of Inspiration. But they who believe
that the Divine Spirit still lives and works in the Church
of England will scarcely regard as an accident that which
will enable all her members and all the world to, respond
heartily and unreservedly to the whole will of God.
We must speak still more plainly. It may have been
the belief of those who drew up the Athanasian Creed that
all sinners must undergo the same endless punishment. It
was a notion which might well prevail in a hard and violent
age. But whether by accident or by the over-ruling Provi
dence of God, Who is using the Church of England as a
special instrument for preaching the whole Gospel of
Christ to every creature, the notion cannot be found dis
tinctly enunciated in any of her Canons, her Articles, or
her Formularies. No one really and practically believes in
this notion ; thousands virtually ignore it, and the highest
Ecclesiastical tribunal has affirmed that such a belief is not
imposed on the Clergy of the Church of England. But it
�&
Eternal Punishment.
is time to speak out the whole truth. It is time to say that
this dogma does not form part of the Gospel of Christ.
It is time to reject it utterly from our teaching, and to bid
all others look the question fully in the face.
The Church of England has not fettered her Clergy to
any definite statement on the endlessness of future punish
ment ; but if such were her dogma, if she asserted clearly
that all who do not die in the faith and fear of God are
tormented necessarily for evei’ and ever, then it is better to
say at once that that dogma must be rejected with a deeper
and more vehement indignation than that with which
Teutonic Christendom rose up against the worst abuses
and superstitions of Latin Christianity. The coarsest
development of the doctrine of Transubstantiation, the
wildest absurdities of Manichean fanatics, were not more
thoroughly opposed to the first principles of Justice, Law,
and Truth than a dogma which makes no distinction
between a perjured tyrant and a lying child. Most happily
such a Reformation is not needed in the Church of England
now; but if ever it be made necessary, the men who shall
carry it out will not be wanting. That Reformation is
sorely needed elsewhere; is it too much to hope that the
Church of England may be the appointed instrument
for hastening that mighty change which shall sweep away
the deadly bondage of an ancient and groundless super
stition ?
�APPENDIX.
No. I.
The “ Christian Remembrancer,” in an article which has been
reprinted by its author, Mr Cazenove, from the number for
April, 1864, has entered elaborately on the defence of the dogma
of never-ending punishment. Enough has been already said to
render a detailed reply to that article altogether unnecessary ;
but a few words may suffice to show how utterly futile its main
arguments are to those who will not grant the assumptions with
which the writer starts. We have reasoned chiefly on the basis
of the authoritative statements of the Church of England as
found in the xxxix articles, nor are we called on to admit any
thing more than may be legally required of her Clergy. But
it may at once be said that the Reviewer’s definition does not
satisfy the teaching of the Bishop of Oxford, or Dr Trench, or
Dr Newman, and that, if his definition be correct, the actual
teaching of such men falls to the ground. “ The dogma,” says
the Reviewer, “ which we have to consider is this,—that there
is a degree of hardness and impenitence of heart which is fraught
with everlasting evil to those who persist in it, and that sucli
obdurate sinners will ultimately be banished from the presence
of Gon and condemned to a state of misery that knows no end.
Upon the details of this fearful condition, neither the Church of
England nor the Church Universal has presumed to utter any
formal or authoritative decision. The reality and the eternity of
the misery is affirmed authoritatively ; the precise nature and
qualities of the sufferings and the nature and locality of the place
where they are to be endured, are open questions, matters of
opinion, not of faith.” But, if this be so, what right has any
Clergyman to draw pictures of demons torturing men by the
members which were the special instruments of their sins, and
point to men like Gibbon and Shelley, nay, even to lying school
children, as suffering the torments of an endless hell ? What right
have any to say that all who do not die in the true faith and
�54
Appendix.
fear of God have entered into that horrible state ? What right
have they to involve themselves and others in a dilemma which
would be absurd if it were not frightful ? for, repudiating (as
they must) the doctrine of Purgatory, they are bound to maintain
that all who are not at their death fitted for heaven must, by the
very necessity of the case, enter hell, and that this must, therefore,
be the lot of nineteen-twentieths of mankind. All these teachers,
it must be noted, uphold a dogma which is not the same as that of
the Reviewer; and what must be the worth of a doctrine which is
stated philosophically by theologians in one way, and alwrays
enforced by preachers in another I To speak briefly, the Re
viewer in the “ Christian Remembrancer ” has made a string of
assumptions, each one of w’hich calls for a distinct denial.
(1.) He assumes that Clergymen (or Laymen) of the Church
of England are bound to believe in the existence of many things
on which its articles are wholly silent—e. g., in that of angels and
of “ those fallen and apostate ones who have Satan as their head
and Captain,” and to admit that the latter sinned in the very
courts of heaven, that man sinned and straightway was ashamed
and penitent, but the demons showed no signs of faith or con
trition. This may be all very well in a treatise on Christian
mythology, but that it should be gravely brought forward in a
paper addressed to educated Englishmen is simply astounding.
(2.) He assumes that the Bible upholds the truth of his
dogma ; and very possibly it may, if we grant his principle “ of
explaining obscure and doubtful passages by the light of those
which are distinct and clear.” No Clergyman of the Church of
England is bound to admit any such principle, and every critic
would at once repudiate it, if it be meant, as here it is meant,
that we may explain ambiguous passages in one author by a com
parison with clear passages in another. The rule would be
scouted as ridiculous if applied to Herodotus and Thucydides,
Aristotle and Plato ; and St Paul and St Peter are quite as
much distinct authors as any of these can be, although we may
happen to have bound up their writings as part of a single volume
which we call the Bible, but of which Jerome and Augustine spoke
only as “ The Books.” It is, indeed, as manifest and as open
to any one to say that St Paul taught unqualified Universalism
as to another to affirm that the notion of an endless punishment
may be found in the words of some other of the Biblical writers. It
has been decided judicially that the Church of England does not
sanction this notion, and the assertion that it is not to be found
in the Bible at once upsets a mere assertion on the other side.
(3.) The Reviewer thinks that he has found an impregnable
stronghold in the alleged universality of certain beliefs. All
mankind, speaking generally, believe he asserts in an endless
�Appendix.
5$
punishment ; and he cites the text of Aristotle o navi ¿>okei tovt'
eivai (¡>apev with the assenting comment of Cicero. To this we
need only say that we are in no way bound to accept without the
strictest scrutiny any statement of Aristotle, or Solomon, or Lord
Bacon himself. The axiom is one of those stupendous fallacies
which have led mankind in all ages to forge their own fetters.
The argument from the universality of a belief proves nothing,
or rather it would establish the truth of many beliefs which
have been given up as horrible, disgusting, and degrading. The
very belief in evil angels, which the Reviewer looks on with so
much favour, exists simply as a mutilated and barren stock ;
in other words, those who profess it do not really believe it. Jt
did produce its legitimate fruit once, when it drove all Christen
dom to believe in witchcraft, and consigned to unspeakable
tortures and a frightful death, hundreds of thousands of miserable
wretches who had the ill luck to be accused of an impossible
crime. There has been, it would seem, a time in the history of
man when every nation, tribe, and family was given over to the
practice of human sacrifices ; the distrust of the mercy and love
of God, the utter forgetfulness of the moral character of God,
•on which that loathsome worship was founded, exists still, and
is the greatest barrier in the way of true Christianity. When
the ignorant peasant doubts whether God can be merciful to or
love a being so worthless as himself, he is giving utterance to the
same feeling which led the Carthaginian matron to drop her new
born babe into the blazing mouth of the favourite god of the
Hebrews. It is the reiterated warning of Jewish prophets and
of Christian teachers, that this distrust is a delusion only the
more horrible and fatal because it is universal. There is not an
atom of foundation for it; what a mockery, therefore, of philo
sophical method is it to say that it upholds one dogma while it is
admitted to overthrow another ?
(4.) The Reviewer argues throughout as against persons who
deny the sinfulness and the misery of sin and the certainty of a
righteous chastisement and discipline, who make nothing of
iniquity, and set lightly by the most sacred responsibilities. He
is arguing against some phantom of his own raising. The school
which he anathematizes does not exist. The very essence of the
teaching of those Clergymen against whom he thus insinuates or
implies an utter unbelief, is that no one sin goes unpunished,
and that all men in the measure in which they need it shall
feel the chastening hand of God. They may be wrong : but it is
simply false to say that they leave men to riot in sin, unchecked
and unwarned.
(5.) He endeavours to divert men from an impartial examina
tion of the subject, by throwing doubts on the orthodoxy of those
�$6
Appendix.
who venture to question the dogma for which he is contending.
Any one who does this is sure to be found wanting with respect
to some cardinal doctrine of the faith (of course as these are
received by the Reviewer himself). Sir James Stephen assailed it,
but “ Mr Hopkins has shown his laxity and want of correct views
on the Incarnation ”; Mr Maurice impugns it, but “ is Mr Maurice
thoroughly trustworthy on the doctrine (z.e. the Reviewer’s doctrine)
of the Atonement ” ? Such insinuations are as irrelevant as they
are weak. Each of these doctrines is true or it is not true ; and it
argues mere unbelief to seek to ward off from any one of them
the most rigid scrutiny. What sort of reasoning is it to scare a
man from looking into one dark corner of his house, by telling
him that they who do so are sure to create disorder in some other
quarter’ ? But it is more to the purpose to say that the Clergy of
the Church of England are bound neither to the Reviewer’s dog
mas nor to his tests ; and they need concern themselves very
little to know wdiether he thinks them orthodox or not. To do
so would argue utter childishness. The theological world of
England is divided into sections, each of which impugns the other’s
orthodoxy. The High Churchman brands the Low Churchman ;
one school anathematises or more gently disapproves another ;
and then, forsooth, they who doubt whether God will commit to
hopeless pains the vast majority of his creatures, are bidden to
see that they be orthodox on all other points before they pry
into this one.
Finally the Reviewer, in utter contradiction to the Bishop of
Oxford and his followers, confines himself mostly to guarded
statements, which might lead the reader to suppose that this
fearful lot is reserved merely for an infinitesimally small fraction
of mankind ; but his hell is, nevertheless, one which contains
unbaptized infants (p. 477), and for Englishmen this is enough.
Dogmas which involve such admissions are not merely untrue,
but they are degrading and demoralizing to the last degree. At
the recent Bristol Congress Mr Keble was pleased to repeat to
the assembled Churchmen the remarks made to him by a poor
old widow, who, on hearing that the Church of England no longer
required her people to believe in the endless punishment of all
sinners, begged him not to tell her son, as she trembled for the effect
which these tidings would have upon him. Mr Keble’s inference
was that the decision in the case of Messrs Williams and Wilson
abolished all morality,—the plain fact being, nevertheless, that
the old woman’s wicked son had somehow or other convinced
himself that he would escape scot free. With such men the threat
of an inconceivable and utterly disproportionate punishment is
not likely to have much weight: to tell them that sin brings its
own punishment and that sinners if not here yet hereafter will be
�Appendix.
made to feel the wrath of God, may check them iu their .course,
but can never cause them to plunge deeper into sin.
This is the warning which they would most certainly hear
from such teachers as Mr Wilson and Mr Maurice, Dr Stanley
and Mr Jowett, the Bishop of Natal and Dean Milman. Like
the righteous prophets of old time, they maintain the absolute
and unswerving righteousness of God, while the upholders of the
popular dogma confuse the moral perceptions of mankind, and
give a fatal strength to the miserable sophistry by which men
cheat themselves into the idea that, be their lives what they may,
they will somehow or other come to die the death of the righteous
man.
No. II.
Remarks on a Sermon on “ Everlasting Punishment,” preached
before the University of Oxford on the Twenty-first Sunday
after Trinity, by E. B. Pusey, D.D.
While these sheets were passing through the press, Dr Pusey
has published a Sermon on which, as it misconstrues some state
ments made in the foregoing pages, a few remarks must be added.
It is certainly an unfortunate thing that the self-styled upholders
of the Catholic Faith should in the eyes of those who differ from
them appear always guilty of misconstructions or assumptions.
Dr Pusey’s Sermon so abounds on both as to make any attempt
at an argumentative reply mere labour lost. It is useless to
reason with those who are resolved to make use of ambiguous
terms, and who even themselves put on these terms more than
one meaning. But although the thought of convincing Dr Pusey
may be absurd, it may be of more use to arm others against his
assumptions, and perhaps against the general character of his
theology. If you answer the question, who is God ? what am
I ? honestly, you have, says Dr Pusey, subdued every difficulty
which men raise against the Faith. It may be so, if we admit
that the honest answer must be Dr Pusey’s answer. A second
assumption is based on a passage in the preceding paper,
p. 9, from which Dr Pusey draws the conclusion that “ human
reason is prepared to capitulate as to all the old difficulties which
it used to be so busy in parading, the Doctrine of the All Holy
Trinity or the Incarnation. ... It will even admit the mystery
of the Incarnation, and allow of that ineffable mystery of God
become Man, that God was born, was nourished at the breast,
E 2
�Appendix.
. . was nailed to the Cross, died." Dr Pusey heaps
assumption on assumption. A belief in the Trinity or Incar
nation is not necessarily his belief, and to the latter the Church
of England has certainly not committed either her Laity or her
Clergy. To the assumptions are added a few contradic
tions. “ What criminal,” he asks, “ ever by nature owned
the justice of the human law which condemned him ? If he admit
that he was in the wrong, yet what punishment does not seem to
him too severe ? ” We may perhaps be perplexed to know where
Dr Pusey has amassed these astounding experiences ; but it is
utterly impossible to reconcile them with the statement in the
very next page (7), that man’s conscience speaks out clearly that
punishment is the due reward of oui’ deeds. When he asserts
that .Reformation is not the object of Divine Punishment (6), he
assumes the very point in dispute, and allows his assumption to
lead him into a statement which should be well noted by English
men. He condemns what he calls the systematized benevolence
of modern legislation. “ Reformation of the individual offender
is proposed as the exclusive end of human punishment.” Dr
Pusey does not like this. We must suppose, therefore, that he
would like a little of the wholesome severity which Laud exer
cised on the ears of Prynne and Bast wick, and perhaps, in course
of time, we need not despair of restoring such pleasant exhibitions
as those which graced the execution of Robert François Damiens.
The next argument involves us in a discussion as to the meaning
of the word Eternity, which directly involves another question,—
what is Revelation ?-—a question equally assumed by Dr Pusey.
“ Who revealed to us,” he asks, “ that sin ceases in the evil, when
life ceases 1 ” (p. 9) ; and who revealed to us, we may ask, that it
goes on ? Dr Pusey’s conviction is founded on the existence and
the character of Satan ; and he must at once be told that the
Church of England does not commit her Clergy to any opinion
about either the one or the other, and they who reject the whole
of Dr Pusey’s dæmonology are, in her eyes, quite as orthodox as
he. They are not in the least bound to believe that Satan
belonged to the second order of beatified Intelligences, or that he
fell, or that he exists at all. Dr Pusey thinks he knows all
about him, and he also knows that the whole history of man
is confined to the last 6,000 years (p. 11). This is a matter
in which we may leave him to be dealt with by Sir C. Lyell,
or Professor Owen. But it is of little use to multiply words.
Dr Pusey builds on verbal expressions in the Gospels, thus
assuming again that evei-y word in those narratives forms part
of an indisputable history. Dr Pusey knows that the people of
England are beginning to doubt this, and he knows that the
reasons brought forward in a popular shape in “ Fraser’s Maga-
�Appendix.
$9
zine ” for January, 1863 (on Criticism and the Gospel History)
have not been answered. He cannot fail to know, further, that
the rich man in Hades is represented as better and less selfish
than he was on earth ; and yet he deals in pictures which would
do credit to the sensuous imagination of a Mahometan. “ Gather
in your mind all which is most loathsome, most revolting, the most
treacherous, malicious, coarse, brutal, inventive, fiendish cruelty,
unsoftened by any remains of human feeling : conceive the fierce,
fiery eyes of hate, spite, phrenzied rage ever fixed on thee,
glaring on thee, looking thee through and through with hate,
sleepless in their horrible gaze : hear those yells of blaspheming
concentrated hate, as they echo along the lurid vault of hell,
every one hating every one,” &c., &c. “ A deathlessness of hate
were in itself everlasting misery. Yet a fixedness in that state,
in which the hardened, malignant sinner dies, involves, with
out any further retribution of God, this endless misery.” (16.)
Shall we ever know what the upholders of this dogma mean ? Who
or what are Dr Pusey’s hardened and malignant sinners ? The
Bishop of Oxford shuts up in hell the lying school-girl and the
young man of excellent life who doubted whether the sun
and moon stood still at Joshua’s bidding : the Reviewer in
the “Christian Remembrancer” seems to think that unbap
tized children are there also. Do they suppose that people
will listen to them until they make their meaning plain,
or rather until they exhibit some better evidence that they
believe their own doctrine ? Before the Bishop and Clergy
of the Diocese of Oxford Mr Disraeli has made a mock of that
doctrine to point a contemptible jest against Mr Maurice
and Mr Jowett ; the ribald profanity of his taunt called forth
not the rebuke but the enthusiastic cheers of that reverend
*
assembly. We may therefore dismiss Dr Pusey’s pictures, with
the bare remark that they are drawn not from the teaching of
Christ oi- of St Paul, but from that Iranian dualism which made
the world a battlefield between Ormuzd and Ahriman. The
attitude which Dr Pusey has assumed makes it still more neces
sary to assert that his teaching is not the teaching of the Church
of England, which knows nothing of the Birth or Death of God.
Dr Pusey is not 'wise in parading phrases which, if they have
any effect, can only exasperate controversy and convert a gradual
process into a violent convulsion.
* Meeting of the Oxford Diocesan Society for the Augmentation of
Small Livings; as reported in the ‘Times,’ November 26, 1864.
Printed by C. W. Reyn ELL, Little Pulteney street, Haymarket, W.
�IH
i
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Eternal punishment: an examination of the doctrine held by the clergy of the Church of England on the subject of future punishment
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: iv, 59 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Donated by Mr. Garley. Includes bibliographical references. Reprinted with additions from the 'National Review' no. XXXI, for January 1863. "With an Appendix containing a reply to the author on universalism and eternal punishment in the "Christian Remembrance" no no CXX, for April 1863, and some remarks on a sermon on everlasting punishment, by the Rev. E.B. Pusey". Date of publication from KVK (OCLC WorldCat).
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Presbyter Anglicanus
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Charles W. Reynell
Subject
The topic of the resource
Church of England
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (<span class="highlight">Eternal</span> <span class="highlight">punishment</span>: an examination of the doctrine held by the clergy of the Church of England on the subject of future <span class="highlight">punishment</span>), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5126
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Church of England
Eternal Punishment
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/21dcb98128d272af596012b22fd333a7.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=E%7EXm0yNd9lMgxyh2aKO0Q7P0Yb9kgyPXtUKBZqnf2imaa3C6bGbZ%7EG-iDAxcy4F5QM23rZ10LtlPys3972XXPqa7lhy2i2CsgcB7mX9u4GDWHmFPGxODvYw230Qoq%7EgW0QtPTBOxCwSZVryC3kCKKgiDyT8Lppaet4quWp27SQicWv%7EfE%7EeLz4N5W2165XAlf61sVzcXAH1rEz6c5WLy8IEV-y71-M92Gf4VirgXh0emQJ24is%7EReqcTXrscBYXQz03xTsWISvrvKWxUPqrSPtDfz%7Et-DQhrFDUGX6TjPxZ3qTcag7iaYUqJX35fSMZOa1tFe0OWkF22mPZ%7E0nyICA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
56e4f61a03cb86567f1d91a5a45dc6c3
PDF Text
Text
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A secularist's principles, or: Which is the true religion?
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 94 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection. Christopher Charles is pseudonym of Charles Cockbill Cattell.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Charles, Christopher
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Frederick Farrah
Subject
The topic of the resource
Secularism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (A secularist's principles, or: Which is the true religion?), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N085
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
NSS
Secularism
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/59304d9f6afbd999ed8c2da29c6a1304.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=vHvoEA9hVzrMp11UN%7EqkOuON3pjHYeGBm5muW%7Ek5AozceSHa2mHxCfk-pXVz5XEooKPuogPl3QKKTAo2pD3s4bM1tD5TG2VvMqRIEd6DqG2chkdxL4AsQf6Ikg0Yk3VpUNnLkUgeVpQNPTERP6tEF8NAT2P2H3leCsfhpqxYr8hZhkUllTl3xpQf8TCjCIHMBZGSb3QV4xHdX70KDYaCJ5awhjW6x1pS-Hj7rXbRuX2hyX4wRwh9c-LM6kEQAOufDDyErNYGn5uLN4gcDfdf5Ri-%7EE9OdW0msJf0fikO7ZAL2%7EUdAEVSkk4QX9269l9oJIsepoifWSKFd5pph7Vgbg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
37bef7a29b8cacb6a1699046c0f65fed
PDF Text
Text
—---------------------------------------------------------
CATALOGUS
SENATUS
ACADEMICL,
ET EORUM
QUI MUNERA ET OFFICIA ACADEMICA GESSERUNT,
QUIQUE ALICUJUS GRADUS LAUREA DONATE SUNT,
COLLEGIO DICKINSONIENSI,
CARLE OLI,
IN
REPUBLICA PENNSYLVANIENSI.
PHILADELPHIA:
-
MDCCCLXIV.
FEDERATE AMERICA! BEIPUBLICi SUMMA! POTESTATIS
ANNO LXXXVII.
�MONITUM.
Magistrates summi et optimates maiusculis:
Evangelii ministri literis Italicis, impressi:
Jurisconsulti, litera j, designati sunt.
Qui nullo titulo notantur Baccalaurei sunt.
Qui e vivis cesserunt, stelligeri sunt.
PHILADELPHIA:
TYPIS, COLLINS, 705 JAYNE STREET.
�CATALOGUS SENATUS ACADEMIC!
CURATORES.
ACCESSUS.
*
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1783
*Johannes Dickinson, LL. D.................................................. 1807
1783
*Henricus Hill.......................................................................1798
1783
*Jacobus Wilson, LL. D........................................................ 1798
1783
*Gulielmus Bingham .
1783
*Benjamin Rush, M. D., LL. D. .
.
.
.
.
.
. 1804
.
.
.
. 1813
1783
*Jacobus Boyd...................................................................... Yl&l
1783
*Johannes McDowell............................................................ 1825
1783
*Henricus-Ernestus Muhlenberg, S. T.D. .
.
. 1815
1783
^Gulielmus Hendel............................................................. 1802
1783
*Jacobus Jacks...................................................... . 1802
1783
*Johannes Black............................................................. 1802
1783
*Alexander Dobbins............................................................ 1809
1783
*Johannes McKnight, S. T. D.............................................. 1794
1783
*Jacobus Ewing...................................................................... 1810
1783
*Robertus McPherson................................................... 1789
1783
*Henricus Slagle............................................................. 1810
1783
*Thomas Hartley...............................................
. 1801
1783
*Michael Hahn...................................................................... 1792
1783
*Johannes King, S. T. D........................................................ 1813
1783
*Robertus Cooper, S. T. D...........................................1805
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
4
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A.D.
A. D.
......
.
1798
■.......................................
.
1807
1783
*Gulielmus Linn, S. T. D.................................
.
1787
1783
*Johannes Linn................................................
.
1821
1783
*Johannes G. Armstrong
.
1794
1808
1794
1783
*Jacobus Lang
1783
*Samuel Waugh
....
1783
*Johannes Montgomery
....
.
1783
*Stephanus Duncan......................................
.
1783
*Thomas Smith ...
.
.
1809
.
1790
.
1815
1783
*Robertus Magaw......................................
1783
*Samuel A. McCoskry
1783
Christophorus-Emanuel Shulze .
.
1788
.
1794
.
.
1788
....
.
1794
.
.
1796
.
1792
.
.
. .
1783
*Petrus Spyker................................................
1783
Johannes Arndt .
1783
*Gulielmus Montgomery
.
1783
*Gulielmus Maclay
1783
*Bernardus Dougherty
....
1783
*David Espy
...
.
1795
1784
1788
.
.
.
1783
*Jacobus Sutton .
.
.
.
.
1783
*Alexander McClean .
.
.
.
1783
*Gulielmus McOleerv......................................
.
1788
1784
Nicholas Kurtz................................................
.
1796
1787
*Josephus Montgomery
.
1794
1787
*Jacobus Latta, S. T. D....................................
.
1801
.
1803
.
.
.
.
1788
*Gulielmus Irvine
1788
*Robertus Johnston......................................
.
1808
1788
*Patricus Alison, S. T. D. .
.
1788
1788
*Jacobus Snodgrass......................................
.
1833
*Johannes Creigh......................................
.
1813
1788
.
.
.
�5
OATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
. ..................................
.
1799
1790
*Thomas Duncan, LL. D............................................
.
1816
1792
*Georgius Stevenson, M. D.......................................
.
1&27
1792
*Ephraimus Blaine................................................
.
1804
1794
*Robertus Cathcart, S. T. D......................................
.
1833
1794
*Nathanael-R. Snowden......................................
.
1827
1794
*Samuel Laird.........................................................
/ 1807
1794
*Carolus M cClure
1789
*Josephus Thornburg
.
.
.
1794 *Jacobus Hamilton................................................
1794
*Michael Ege
.
•
•
1811
.
•
1820
.
• * •
1815
1821
1795
*Samuel Weakley................................................
.
1796
*Johannes Campbell, S. T. D.....................................
.
1820
1796
*Jacobus Armstrong................................................
.
1826
1802
1798
* Thomas McPherrin,
......
.
1798
*Jacobus Riddle................................................
,
1833
1798
*Franciscus Gurney................................................
.
1815
1799
*Carolus Smith, LL.D................................................
.
1824
1801
*David Denny.........................................................
.
1833
1801
*David Watts..........................................................
.
1820
1802
*Joshua Williams, S. T. D.
.
1821
1802
^Johannes Young
......
.
1803
1802
*Robertus Coleman................................................
.
1826
1802
David McConaughy, S. T. D....................................
.
1834
1803
*Hugo-H. Brackenridge......................................
.
1816
1803
Franciscus Herron, S.T. D......................................
.
1816
1804
*J onathan Walker................................................
.
1824
1805
*Nathan Grier...............................................
.
1814
1807
*Jonathan Helfenstein......................................
.
1826
.
�6
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A. D.
A. D.
. .
.
.
1808
.
1820
1807
*Jacobus Duncan
1808
*Jacobus Gustine................................................
1808
*Gulielmus Alexander......................................
.
1814
1833
.
.
1808
*Jacobus Hendel................................................
.
1809
*Robertus Davidson, S. T. D.
.
1812
1809
Gulielmus-M. Brown................................................
.
.
.
' .
.
1827
.
1826
1811
*Robertus Blaine
1814
*Andreas Carothers................................................
.
1833
1814
*Johannes Lind.........................................................
.
1825
.
1828
.
...
1814
*Franciscus Pringle .
1815
Nathaniel Chapman, M. D.........................................
.
1833
1815
*E dvardus-J acobus Stiles....................................... '
.
1827
1815
*Johannes McKnight, S.T. D...................................
.
1820
1815
Albertus Helfenstein................................................
.
1826
1815
Georgius-A. Lyon................................................
.
1833
1816
*Johannes-Bannister Gibson, LL. D. .
.
1829
1816
Amos Ellmaker..........................................................
.
1821
1820
Georgius Duffield, S. T. D.
.
1833
1820
*Henricus-R. Wilson................................................
.
1825
1820
Johannes Swartzwelder......................................
.
1825
1820
*Isaias Graham
.
1834
1820
Johannes Moodey
................................................
.
1834
1820
Isaacus-B. Parker................................................
.
1833
1820
Alexander Mahon................................................
.
1827
1820
*Josephus Knox..........................................................
.
1827
1820
Gulielmus-N. Irvine................................................
.
1833
1820
*Jacobus Alter..........................................................
.
1823
1820
*Andreas Boden................................................
.
1827
.
.
...
...
�7
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1821
Gulielmus-R. Dewitt, S. T. D...................................
.
1834
1821
*Johannes Reed, LL.D.............................................
.
1828
1821
Johannes-S. Ebaugh................................................
.
1833
1821
Gulielmus-C. Chambers, M.D...................................
.
1833
1823
*Ashbel Green, S. T. D., LL. D................................
.
1826
1824
^Michael Ege.........................................................
.
1827
1824
Benjamin Keller................................................
1824
*Johannes-F. Grier, S. T. D....................................
1824
Jacobus Hamilton................................................
.' 1833
1825
* Georgius Lochman, S. T. D....................................
.
1826
1825
Georgius Metzger................................................
.
1833
1825
Johannes-Duncan Mahon......................................
.
1834
1826
Redmond Conyngham.......................................
.
1827
1826
Benjamin Stiles......................................
.
1827
1826
Ricardus Rush.........................................................
.
1832
1827
David Elliott, S. T. D.......................................
.
1829
1827
*Johannes Nevin
.
1830
1827
Samuel Agnew, M.D.......................................
.
1832
1827
*Johannes McClure................................................
.
1833
1827
*Johannes Creigh................................................
.
1833
1827
Georgius Chambers................................................
.
1834
1827
Carolus-Bingham Penrose......................................
.
1833
1827
*Samuel Alexander................................................
.
1833
1828
Samuel-S. Schmucker, S.T. D.
.
1833
1833
.
.
\
.
.
.
1833
.
.
.
1829
1828
*Calvinus Blythe................................................
.
1828
Fredericus Watts................................................
.
1833
1828
*Gabriel Hiester................................................
.
1833
*Jacobus Coleman................................................
.
1833
1828
�OATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
8
EXITUS.-
ACCESSUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1829
Jacobus-M. Haldeman
........................................... 1833
1829
*Samuel Baird
........................................... 1833
1829
Johannes Paxton, M.D.
........................................... 1833
1829
*Alexander Fridge
........................................... 1833
1829
*Johannes-V.-E. Thorn
........................................... 1833
1830
Alexander Nisbet
........................................... 1833
1831
Jesse-Duncan Elliott .
........................................... 1833
1833
*Rt.-Rev. Johannes Emory, S.T. D..................................... 1836
1833
*Johannes McLean, LL.D. Cur. Sup. Feed. Iud. Ads.
1833
*Stephanas-Georgius Roszel
........................................... 1841
1833
*Josephus Lybrand
........................................... 1844
1833
Alfredus Griffith
1833
*Samuel Harvey .
1833
Job Guest
1833
*Henricus Antes .
1833
*Theodorus Myers, M. D.
...........................................1839
1833
*Johannes-M. Keagy, M.D.
........................................... 1835
1833
*Samuel Baker, M. D. .
........................................... 1836
1833
Johannes Davis
1833
*Johannes Phillips
...................................... 1860
1833
Matthaeus Anderson, M. D.
........................................... 1838
1833
Ira Day, M.D.
1833
*Ricardus Benson
........................................... 1844
1833
*Thomas Sewall, M. D.
........................................... 1845
1833
Henricus Hicks .
........................................... 1837
1833
Georgius-W. Nabb
...........................................1840
1833
Samuel-H. Higgins
........................................... 1837
1833
Carolus-A. Warfield
1855
........................................... 1848
......
........................................... 1836
.
.
.
.
1840
.......................................... 1843
.
.
...........................................1837
�9
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
Jacobus Roberts.........................................................
.
1835
1833
Jacobus Dunlop.........................................................
.
1839
1833
*Benjamin Matthias
.
1850
1846
1833
I
.
.
'.
1833
*Carolus McClure................................................
.
1833
Samuel-E. Parker................................................
.
1835
1833
*Gulielmus-M. Biddle................................................
.
1855
1833
Thomas-A. Budd................................................
.
1843
1833
*Thomas-Emerson Bond, M.D..................................
.
1835
1833
Jacobus-B. Longacre
1833
Josephus Holdich, S. T. D..........................................
.
1835
1833
* Carolus Pitman,
.
1854
1834
Henricus Boehm .......
.
1838
1834
Gulielmus Hamilton................................................
.
1838
1834 Jacobus Watson.........................................................
.
1839
.
1847
1834 *Johannes Harper
1834
....
.
.
.
.
.
1837
.
1836
.
.
1837
Jacobus Massey.........................................................
.
1834
'
Carolus-F. Mayer
1835
Thomas-Chapman Thornton
1835
Josephus-S. Carson .
1835
Solomon Higgins................................................
.
1838
1835
Matthaeus Sorin ...
.
1838
1835
Thomas-Jefferson Thompson
1835
Jacob Weaver......................................
.
1850
1836
Rt.-Rev. Jacobus-Osgood Andrew, S.T. D.
.
1839
1836
Comfort Tiffany.........................................................
.
1858
1836
Samuel-B. Martin, M.D..............................................
.
1838
1836
*Georgius-Grimston Cookman .
.
1840
1837
Samuel Ashmead................................................
.
1855
...
...
.
.
.
�10
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1837
Henricus Holden ....
.
1840
1837
Alexander-L. Hays
.
1841
1837
Jacobus Wright .
.
1859
1837
Thomas-B. Sargent, S. T. D.
1837
Johannes-A. Elkinton, M.D.
.
1840
1838
*Ricardus Battee
.
1848
1838
Martinus-W. Bates, LL. D.
.
1851
1838
Johannes-S. Porter
.
1855
.
1838
Edmundus-S. Janes
.
1839
1838
Manning Force .
.
1843
1838
*Johannes Davis
.
1854
1839
Levi Scott
.
1841
.
.
.
.
1839
*Gulielmus-D. Seymour
.
1841
1839
Robertas Morris .
.
1841
1839
*Rt.-Rev. Beverly Waugh, S. T. D.
.
1858
1839
Jacobus-S. Owens
'.
1845
1840
Jacobus Carrigan
.
1857
1840
Johannes Herr
.
1845
1840
Johannes Buckman
.
1842
1841
Gulielmus Hamilton, S.T.D.
1841
*Robertus Emory, S.T.D.
.
1845
1841
Johannes Kennaday, S. T. D.
.
1852
1841
Jacobus Bishop .
.
1861
1841
*Henricus Antes
.
1856
1841
Fredericus Watts
.
1844
1842
Carolus-W. Roberts
.
1845
1843
Garolus-B. Tippett, S. T. D.
1843
Ricardus-W. Dodson .
.
1847
.
�11
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
.
1851
1843
Archibaldus Wright................................................
1844
Jacobus-J. Boswell................................................
.
1850
1844
Edvinus-L. Janes................................................
.
1845
1844
*Johannes-J. Myers, M.D..........................................
.
1854
1845
Thomas Browne
......
.
1850
1845
David Creamer
1845
Andreas Hay.........................................................
.
1857
1845
*Stephanus-Asbury Roszel......................................
.
1852
1845
Johannes-Price Durbin, S. T. D.
1846
Jesse Bowman.........................................................
.
1859
1846
Ricardus-H. Carter................................................
.
1848
1847
Albertus-J. Ritchie, M.D..........................................
.
1856
1847
Abrahamus-Herr Smith
1848
Daniel-Moore Bates
.
1859
.
1857
.
1860
.
1856
1848
Walker-P. Conway
1848
Johannes McClintock, S.T.D....................................
1848
S.-A. Barton, M.D.
1850
G-ulielmus-H. Allen, M. D., LL. D.
1850
Johannes Whiteman
1850
Christianus Stayman
1850
Johannes-F. Bird, M. D.
1850
Spencer-F. Baird, D. P. S...........................................
1851
Alexander Cummings .
.
•
/ •
1852
Franciscus Hodgson, S.T.D.
1852
Jesse-Truesdale Peck, S.T.D....................................
1854
Aquila-A. Reese, S.T.D.
1854
Johannes Tonner
1855
Pennel Coombe
�12
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A.D.
A. D.
1855
. 1855
Gulielmus-H. Miller
Daniel Pierson.
1857
1855
Carolus-Josephus Baker
1856
Hon. Augustus-O. Hiester
1856
Johannes-Armstrong Wright
1857
W.-E. Tunison .
1857
Edvinus Wilmer
1857
Johannes-O. Harkness.................................................... 1859
1858
Gulielmus-E. Perry
1858
1858 Hon. Johannes-H. Phillips
1858 Hon. Georgius-F. Fort..................................................... 1862
1858
Samuel-A. Williams, M.D.
1858
Bev. Bernardus-Harrison Nadal, S.T.D.
1858
Rt.-Rev. Levi Scott, S.T.D.
1859
Johannes Carson
1859 Gulielmus-Ryland Woodward
1859 Samuel-Y. Munroe
1859
Jacobus Rheem
1860
Isaacus-P. Cook
1861
Jacobus-Fowler Rusling
1862
Josephus-C. De Lacour
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
13
Curatorum numerus integer...........................................265
Ex officio decesserunt.............................................................. 225
Supersunt adhuc......................................................................... 40
Evangelii Ministrorum numeros............................................. 95
Ex officio decesserunt................................................................ 72
Supersunt adhuc......................................................................... 13
PRESIDES CURATORUM.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A. D.
A. D.
*Johannes Dickinson, LL.D......................................
.
1808
1808
*Johannes King, S.T.D.............................................
.
1808
1808
*Jacobus Armstrong................................................
.
1824
1824
*Johannes-Bannister Gibson, LL.D. .
.
1829
1833
1783
1829
*Andreas Carothers
.....
.
1833
*Johannes Emory, S.T.D......................................
.
1834
1834
Johannes-Price Durbin, S.T.D. »
.
1845
1844
1847
1842
*Robertus Emory {pro tern.)
....
.
1845
*Robertus Emory, S. T. D..........................................
.
1848
*Rt.-Rev. Beverly Waugh, S.T.D. {pro tern.) .
.
1848
1849
Jesse-Truesdale Peele, S.T.D...................................
.
1852
1852
Carolus Collins, S.T.D..............................................
.
1860
1860
Uerman-Merrills Johnson, S.T.D.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
14
SCRIB ZE.
EXITUS.
ACCESSVS.
A. D.
A. D.
.
1784
.
1792
1783
* Gulielmus Linn, S. T. D. .
1784
*Thomas Duncan, LL.D.
1792
*Thomas Creigh .
.
1796
1796
*Jacobus Duncan
.
1806
1806
*Alexander-P. Lyon
.
.
1808
1808
*Andreas Carothers
.
.
1814
1820
•
.
1814
Isaacus-B. Parker
.
1820
Jacobus Hamilton
.
1824
1824
Fredericus Watts
.
1828
1828
Samuel-A. McCoskry, S.T.D.
.
1831
1831
*Gulielmus-M. Biddle .
.
1833
1833
Carolus-Bingham Penrose .
.
1837
1837
Johannes McClintock .
.
1848
1848
Gulielmus-Henricus Allen .
.
1850
1850
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall
.
1854
1854
Otis-Henricus Tiffany
.
1857
1857
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall
.
1858
1858
Gulielmus-Laws Boswell.
THESAURARII.
1784
*Samuel Laird
.
1790
1790
*Samuel Postlethwaite
.
1798
1798
*Johannes Montgomery
.
1808
1808
*Johannes Miller
.
1821
1821
Andreas McDowell
.
1833
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
15
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A.D.
....
1833
*Johannes-Jacobus Myers, M.D.
1841
*Gulielmus-D.Seymour..................................................... 1854
1854
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall.......................................... 1861
1861
Samuel-Dickinson Hillman.
1841
BIBLIOTHECARII.
1784
*Jacobus Ross, A.M.................................................... 1792
1794
*Gulielmus Thomson, A. M...........................................1804
1804
Johannes Borland, A.M..........................................................1805
1807
Johannes Hayes, A. M............................................................. 1809
1809
*Henricus-R. Wilson, A.M................................................... 1813
1813
Josephus Shaw, A/AL................................................... 1815
1815
Gerardus-E. Stack, A.M......................................................... 1816
1822
*Josephus Spencer, A.M........................................................ 1830
1830
Carolus-Dexter Oleaveland, A.M......................................... 1832
1834
*Robertus Emory, A..AL........................................................ 1840
1840
Johannes McClintock, A.M...................................................1848
1848
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall,A.M........................................ 1860
1860
Gulielmus-Laws Boswell, A.M.
�PRIM ARII.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1784
* Carolus Nisbet, S. T. D.............................................
.
1804
1804
*Robertus Davidson, S. T. D. (pro tem.)
.
1809
1809
Jeremias Atwater, S. T. D.
.
1815
1815
*Johannes McKnight, S. T. D. (pro tem.)
.
1816
1821
Johannes-Mitchell Mason, S. T. D.
.
1824
1824
Gulielmus Neill, S. T. D.............................................
.
1829
1830
Samuel-B. How, S. T. D.............................................
, 1832
1833
Johannes-Price Durbin, S. T. D.
.
1845
1845
*Robertus Emory, S. T. D.
.
1848
.
.
1848
Jesse-Truesdale Peck, S. T. D.
1852
Carolus Collins, S.T.D...............................................
1860
Herman-Merrills Johnson, S. T. D.
.
.
1852
.
1860
PROFESSORES.
PHILOSOPHIC MORALIS
1809
Jeremias Atwater, S.T.D. ;
.
.
1815
1815
*Johannes McKnight, S.T.D...................................
.
1816
1821
*Johannes-Mitchell Mason, S.T.D.
.
1824
1824
Gulielmus Neill, S.T. D..............................................
.
1829
1830
Samuel-B. How, S. T. D..............................................
.
1832
1833
Johannes-Price Durbin, S. T. D.
.
1845
�17
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1845
*Robertus Emory, S. T. D. . -
1848
.
.
1848
Jesse-Truesdale Peck, S.T D....................................
.
1852
1852
Carolus Collins, S. T. D..............................................
.
1860
1860
Herman-Merrills Johnson, S.T.D.
LINGUARUM LITERARUM GRH3CZE ET LATINZE.
1784
*Jacobus Ross, A. M.
.
1792
1794
*Gulielmus Thomson, A. M.
.
1804
1804
Johannes Borland, A. M.
...
.
1805
1807
*Johannes Hayes, A. M....................................
.
1809
1809
*Henricus-R. Wilson, A. M.
.
1813
1813
Josephus Shaw, A. M.
.
1815
1816
Gerardus-E. Stack, A. M. (pro terni) .
.
1816
1822
*Josephus Spencer, A.^IL..................................
.
1830
1830
Carolus-Dexter Cleveland, A. M.
.
1832
1834
*Robertus Emory, A. M..................................
.
1840
1840
Johannes McClintock, A. M.
.
1848
1846
Georgius-Ricardus Crooks, A.M. (Adjunct).
.
1848
1848
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall (Adjunct).
.
1850
1850
Jacobus Gulielmus Marshall
.
1860
HISTORI2E, GEOGRAPHIZE, CHRONOLOGIZE
ET RHETORICZE.
1785
* Robertas Davidson, S. T. D.
.
1804
MATHESIS ET PHILOSOPHIZE NATURALIS.
1786
*Robertus Johnston, A. M.
1792
1821
.
>
.
1787
*Jacobus McCormick, A. M.
.
1811
Henricus Vethake, LL. D.
2
.
1829
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
18
PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS.
EXITUS.
ACCESSUS.
a.
A. D.
1804
* Robertas Davidson, S.T.D.
n.
•
1811
.
1814
MATHESIS.
1811
*Jacobus McCormick, A. M.
1814
Eugenius Nulty, A. M.......................................
1830
Alexander McFarlane, A. M.
1834
*Merritt Caldwell, A. M...................................
1836
Johannes McClintock, A. M.
1840
*Thomas-Emory Sudler, A. M.
1816
•
1840
.
.
1832
•
.
1851
1836
1848
Otis-Henricus Tiffany, A. M. (Adjunct)
■
1851
1851
Otis-Henricus Tiffany, A. M.
•
1857
1857
Gulielmus-Laws Boswell, A. M.
•
1860
1860
Samuel-Dickibson Hillman, A. M.
.
CHEMISE ET PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS.
1811
*Thomas Cooper, M. D., LL. D.
.
1815
1828
Johannes-K. Finley, M.D.
•
1829
1830
Henricus-D. Rogers, A. M.
•
1831
1835
*Johannes-M. Keagy, M. D.
.
1836
1836
Gulielmus-Henricus Allen, A. M., M. D.
.
1848
1848
Spencerus-F. Baird, A.M., M.D.
•
1850
1850
Erastus Wentworth, A. M., S. T. D. .
1854
Gulielmus-Carlisle Wilson, A. M.
1854
LINGUC ET LITERARUM GRCCARUM.
1811
Johannes Borland, A. M....................................
1812
�19
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
LINGUARUM RECENTIORUM.
ACCESSUS.
EXITUS.
A. D.
A. D.
1814
Claudius Berard, A. M.
1825
.
Ludovicus Mayer, S. T. D.
, .
.
.
.
.
1816
.
.
.,
.
.
1826
RHETORICS, METAPHYSICORUM ET ETHICORUM.
1821
Alexander Me Clelland, S. T. D.
....
1829
JURISPRUDENTI2E.
1834
Johannes Reed, LL.D.............................................................. 1850
1862
Jacobus-Hutchison Graham, LL. D.
METAPHYSICORUM ET ECONOMISE POLITICAL
1836
*Merritt Caldwell, A.M............................................................ 1848
LINGU2E ET LITERARUM LATINARUM.
1837
*Stephanus-Asbury Roszell, A. M.......................................... 1838
LINGUARUM ORIENTALIUM ET RECENTIUM.
.
1846
Carolus-Edvardus Blumenthal, A.M., M.D.
1854
Alexander-J. Schem, A.M............................................ 1860
.
1854
PHILOSOPHIES ET LITERARUM ANGLICARUM.
1848
Gulielmus-Henricus Allen, A.M., M.D.
.
.
.
1850
1850
Herman-Merrills Johnson, A.M., S.T.D. .
.
.
1860
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
20
LINGUARUM LATINH5 ET GALLI CHI.
EXITUS.
ACCESS US.
A. D.
A. D.
1860
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall, A.M....................................
1862
1861
Johannes-Keagy Stayman, A.M. (Adjunct).
1862
1862
Johannes-Keagy Stayman, A.M.
1860
Gulielmus-Laws Boswell, A. M.
LINGUARUM GRH1CHJ ET GERMANICHS.
TUTORES ET PKTCEPTORES.
1785
Robertus Johnson, A. M......................................................
1786
1788
*Jacobus McCormick, A. B................................................
1792
1792
Carolus Huston, A. B.................................................
1793
1793
Henricus-L. Davis, A. B.......................................................
1794
1805
Johannes Hayes, A. B..........................................................
1807
1810
Fredericus Aigster, A. B.
1810
Johannes McClure, A. B......................................................
1811
1812
Robertus-C. Grier, A. B........................................................
1813
1826
Johannes-W. Vethake, A.M., M.D. Chem. Prcel.
1827
1827
Johannes-K. Finley, M.D. Chem. Prcel.
1828
1831
1811
.
Olmstead, A. M. Ghem. Prcel.. .
1832
1838
Thomas-Verner Moore, A. B..............................................
1839
1839
*Johannes Zug, A. B.................................................
1840
1839
Gulielmus-Smith Waters, A. B...........................................
1840
1851
Amos-Forry Musselman, A. B............................................
1854
1854
Benjamin Arbogast, A. B.
1856
.......................................
�1864:.
PRIMARIUS.
HERMAN-MERRILLS JOHNSON, S.T.D
PROFESSORES.
GULIELMUS-CARLILE WILSON, A. M.,
CHEMI® ET PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS PROFESSOR.
GULIELMUS-LAWS BOSWELL, A.M.,
LINGUARUM GR®C® ET GERMANIC® PROFESSOR.
SAMUEL-DICKINSON HILLMAN, A. M.,
MATHESIS PROFESSOR.
JOHANNES-KEAGY STAYMAN, A. M.,
LINGUARUM LATIN® ET GALLIC® PROFESSOR.
JACOBUS-HUTCHISON GRAHAM, LL.D.,
JURISPRUDENT!® PROFESSOR.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1787.
*Isaias Blair, A. M.
*Johannes Boyce.
*Johannes Bryson.
*Robertus Duncan, A. M.
*Jacobus Gittings.
*David McKeehan, A. M.
*Steel Semple, A. M.
*Jonatban Walker, j, A. M.
*David Watts, j, A. M.
1788.
*Johannes Boyd.
*Thomas Creigh, j, A. M.
* David Denny, A. M.
*Jacobus Duncan, j, A. M.
*Isaacus Grier, A. M.
*Jacobus McClanahan.
*Jacobus McClean.
*Johannes McPherrin.
^Matthceus Sinclair.
*Gulielmus Speer, A. M.
* Johannes Young, A. M.
1789.
Samuel Brown.
*Jacobus Calhoun, A. M.
Jacobus Crawford.
*David Hoge.
*Carolus Huston, j, Tutor, Reip.
Penn. Cur. Sup. Jurid.
*Samuel Mahon.
*Jacobus More.
* Alexander Sanderson.
Jacobus Scott.
9
1790.
* Gulielmus Baldridge.
9 Jacobus-P. Boyd.
*Jacobus-B. Brotherton, A.M.
*Franciscus Dunleavy.
*Josephus-S. Galbreath.
Ricardus Henderson.
*1809. *Thomas-G. Peachey.
*1845. *Johannes Purviance, j.
*Johannes Shippen.
*Robertus Smith.
Johannes Thompson.
*Robertus-G. Wilson, S.T.D.,
Coll. Neo-Caes. 1818., Univ. Ohio
Praeses.
*1851.
12
11
1792.
^Johannes Brackenridge.
*Robertus Callender, A. M.
Gulielmus Carcaud.
*David Casset, j, A. M.
*Johannes Creigh, M. D. Univ.
Penn., A. M.
*1848—75.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
23
*Franciscus Herron, A. M., S.T.D.
*Samuel Davidson.
Coll. Jeff.
*1860.
Georgius Dugan.
*Callender Irvine.
Hayden Edwards.
Johannes Jack.
*J ohannes Foulke.
*Ricardus Johns.
Jacobus Gilleland.
Robertus Knox.
Jacobus Hemphill.
*Franciscus Laird.
*Gulielmus Hunter.
*Gulielmus Laird, M. D.
*Jacobus Laird.
Austin Leake.
*Josias Leake.
*Johannes Lyon, Rhet. et Ment. Randall McGavock.
Jacobus McGill.
Phil. Prof. Un. Op. Coll.
*Alexander Nisbet, j, A. M.
Maxwell McDowell, A. M.
*Gulielmus Noland.
Johannes McJimsey.
*Gulielmus Patten.
*Johannes McKesson.
Austin Wharton.
Jacobus Me Knight.
Jesse Wharton, Reip. Faed. Sen.
Johannes Moore.
20
*Jacobus Postlethwaite.
Samuel Reynolds.
1795.
Carolus Ross.
Austin Smith.
Gualterus Breden.
Jacobus Smith.
*Samuel Bryson.
*Andreas Steel.
*Abrahamus Craig.
*Gulielmus Steel, A. M.
Gulielmus Creighton.
Johannes Steel, A. M.
*Patricus Davidson, A. M.
Johannes Todd.
Samuel Donald.
Isaacus Wayne, A. M.
Gulielmus-Aston Harper.
Robertos Whitehill, e Cong. Jacobus Hasson.
Repr.
*Jacobus Irvine, A. M., M. D.
Johannes Wilson.
*Johannes Kennedy, j, Reip. Penn.
* Gulielmus Woods.
33
Cur. Sup. Jurid.
*Johannes Lyon, j.
1794.
*Thomas McClelland.
McConaughy, A. M,
Gulielmus Brown.
S.T.D., Coll. Jeff., Coll. Wash.
*Ma tthae us Bro wn, S. T. D., C oil.
Neo-Caes. et Coll. Wash. 1823;
Praeses.
LL.D. Coll. Hamilt. 1835 ; Coll. Andreas Moore.
Wash, et Jeff. Praeses.
*1852. *Johannes Nevin.
*Henricus Lyon Davis, S. T. D. Johannes Passmore.
*Georgius Reid, A. M.
Coll. Sane. Johann. Praes.
*Gulielmus-O. Sprigg.
*Alexander Dow.
Gulielmus Sterret.
David Hayes, A. M.
�24
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Gulielmus Stuart.
Rogerus-Brooke Taney, j, A. M.,
LL.D. 1831, Reip. Faed. Civ.
Sec., Attorn. Prine., et Cur. Sup.
Jurid. Prine.
*Josias Williams, A. M., S. T. D.
Coll. Jeff.
Josua Williams.
Edvardus Work.
24
1797.
* Gulielmus Breden.
*Jacobus Graham.
* Thomas Grier.
*Robertus Kennedy, A. M.
*Thomas McComb.
*Moses Montgomery,
Edvinus Putnam, A. M.
Henricus-M. Ridgeley, A. M.,
Reip. Faed. Sen.
Jacobus Thompson, A. M.
9
1798.
■
*Jacobus Adair.
*Samuel Agnew, A. M., M. D. Coll.
Jeff. Med.
*Johannes-B. Alexander, j.
*Jacobus Brady, A. M.
*Andreas Buchanan.
*Levi Bull, S. T. D.
Johannes Cooper.
*Gulielmus Downey, M.D. Univ.
Penn.
Jacobus-D. Greason, A. M.
*Jacobus Gustine, A. M., M. D.
Jacobus Guthrie.
*Georgius Hayes.
*Thompson Holmes, A.M., M.D.
Univ. Penn.
*Robertus Houston. M. D.
Josua Knight.
*Amos-A. McGinley, S.T.D.
*Gulielmus-F. Mitchel.
* Alexander Monteith.
*Robertas Proudfit, A. M., S. T. D.,
Lingg. Graec. Rom. q. Prof. Coll.
Cone.
* Gulielmus Rainey.
*Thomas Stockton.
*Johannes Waugh, A. M.
*Renricus-R. Wilson, A. M.,
S. T. D., Lingg. Graec. Rom. q.
Prof.
*Johannes Wright.
*185524
1799.
*Samuel Ball.
* Alexander-H. Boyd, A. M.
Armstrong Brandon.
* Carolus Cummins, A. M., S. T. D.
Coll. Sane. Johann. 1830.
*1863—86.
Jacobus Gilleland.
Thomas Hood.
Johannes Preston.
*Stewart Williamson, A. M.
8
1800.
*Jesse Duncan.
*Georgius-D. Foulke, A.M., M.D.
Isaacus Grier.
*Johannes Hillyard.
* Georgius Stevenson.
5
1802.
Samuel Bell.
* J acobus-Rice Black, A. M., Reip.
Del. Cur. Sup. Jurid.
*Johannes Hutchinson.
* Johannes Lind, A. M.
*Johannes McClure, A. M., Tut.
Gulielmus Patterson.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
25
David Elliot, A. M., S. T. D.,
Coll. Jeff., Coll. Wash., et Acad.
Theol. Occid. Praeses.
*Johannes Fisher.
1803.
Jacobus-H. Miller, M.D. Univ.
*Alexander Boyd, A. M.
Penn., Praes. et Prof. Anat. et
*Jacobus Buchanan.
Physiol. Univ. Wash. Balt.
*Johannes-Ferguson Grier, A. M., *Franciscus Pringle.
S.T.D.
*Jacobus Pringle.
Johannes- 0 'Neil.
*Henricus Shippen, A. M.
* Jacobus Sharon.
*1843. *Jasper Slaymaker.
Johannes Williamson.
11
Crawford White.
Samuel Woods.
8
1805.
(VIII. CAL. MAI.)
1809.
*Georgius Clark, A. M.
Alexander Brackenridge, j, A. M.
*Johannes Clark, A. M.
Jacobus Buchanan, j, A.M., LL.D.
*Robertus Graham.
1842, et Coll. Rutg. 1849 et Neo*Ricardus Gustine.
Caes. 1850, e Cong. Reip. Faed.
*Johannes Hayes, A. M., Tutor,
Repr. Etiam. Sen., Apud. Caes.
Rom. etGraec. Lingg.etLitt.Prof.
Russ. Legatus., Apud. Maj. Brit.
* Georgius Stewart, A. M.
Legatus, Reipublic^e F^ederat^e
Prases.
(vn. CAL. OCT.)
*Henricus-M. Campbell, j, A. M.
*Gulielmus Barr.
*Alfredus Foster, A. M., M.D.
Georgius Buchanan, A. M.
Johannes-N-Caldwell Grier,S.T.D.
Stephanus Duncan, M. D.
Johannes-Hays Grier.
Jacobus Linn, A. M., S. T. D.
Johannes-Walker Grier, Reip.
*Alexander Mahon, j.
11
Faed. Nav. Capel.
Robertus-Smith Grier.
1806.
*Gulielmus Irwin.
Robertus Laverty.
*Jesse Magaw, M.D.
*Gulielmus Mcllvaine.
*David Pringle,
Lloyd Noland.
*Andreas-K. Russell.
Johannes Smith, A. M. et Tutor Samuel Parke.
Neo-Caes.
4 *Gulielmus Williamson.
*Jacob Zell.
15
1808.
*Johannes-W. Armor.
*Gulielmus-A. Boyd.
*Samuel-P. Duncan.
1810.
'
*Johannes-E. Grier, M. D.
Paulus-S. Pierce.
�26
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
*Samuel-D. Ramsey.
*Thomas-Bull Smith.
Samuel-A. Marsteller, j.
4 Carolus-F. Mayer, j, A. M.
*Jacobus McCormick.
Gulielmus-S. McPherson, j.
1811.
Robertus Patton, j.
Benjamin Collett.
*Georgius-L. Potter.
*Gulielmus Findley, j.
*Jacobus D. Riddle.
*Carolus-P. Gordon, j, A. M.
Jacobus-Sproat Green, j, A. M. Jacobus Sykes.
Neo-Caes. ibique Curat, et Juris- Jesse Taylor.
prud. Prof., Reip. Faed. Dist. Neo- *Georgius Travers.
Gulielmus-M. Worthington, A.M.
Caes. Attorn.
26
Timotheus-J. Harrison.
Johannes-A. Henderson.
1813.
*Georgius-R. Hopkins.
^Johannes Knox, S. T. D. Coll. *Jacobus-B. Beverly.
Wash.
*1858. Lenox Birckhead.
*Jacobus-S. Craft, j, A.M.
*Thomas-M. Read.
*Thomas-B. Veazey, A. M.
10 *Harmar Denny, j, e Cong. Repr.
*1852.
Jacobus-B. Finley, A. M.
1812.
*Dennis Hagan.
*Samuel Alexander, j, A. M.
Josephus-A. Maybin, j, A.M.
Addison Belt.
*Gulielmus McFarlane.
Gulielmus-B. Beverly.
*Jacol)us-G. McNeiley, A.M. Gram.
Thomas-T. Blackford, M.D. Univ.
Sch. Prim.
Penn.
*Gulielmus-D. Mercer, M. D.
*Calvinus Blythe, j, A.M., Sec. Pol. Isaacus-A. Ogden, A. M.
et Att. Gen. Reip. Penn.
*Robertus Ralston.
Johannes Brown.
Jacobus Somerville.
Colin Cooke.
Ricardus Wootton.
*Jacobus Dunlop, j, A. M.
*Gulielmus Young.
15
*Gulielmus Goldsborough, M. D.
Thomas-J. Graham.
1814.
Robertus-C. Grier, j, A.M., Tutor,
LL. D., Reip. Faed. Cur. Sup. *Samuel-D. Blackiston.
*Ephraimus-M. Blaine, M.D. Univ.
Jurid. Ads.
Penn.
Jacobus Hamilton, j, A.M.
Jacobus Brown.
Alexander-L. Hays, j, A. M.
* Johannes Carothers, M.D. Univ.
Jeremias-Furman Learning.
Penn.
Ricardus-Henricus Lee, A. M.
1826, LL. D. 1854, Rhet. Prof. *Jesse-Y. Castor.
*Gulielmus Chambers, M. D.
Coll. Wash.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
*Jeremias Chamberlain, S. T. D.
Coll. Cent., Coll. Louis, et Coll.
Oakl. Praeses.
*1850.
Josias Clapham.
*Thomas-B. Cobean, M. D. Univ.
Penn.
*Gulielmus-H. Denny, M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Festus Dickinson.
Josias Hawkins.
Johannes-J. Linton.
*Johannes-Duncan Mahon, j, A.M.
*1861.
Mardochaeus McKinney, j, A. M.
Humphredus-B. Powell.
Ricardus-R. Randolph.
Jacob Snyder.
Carolus-F. Spoering.
Gulielmus Tingle.
Johannes-F. Tyler.
*Stephanus-Duncan Walker, j, A.M.
*Jacobus S. Woods, S. T. D. *1862.
23
1815.
Franciscus-W. Brooke.
Julius Forrest.
*David-W. Huling, j.
Petrus-H. Ihrie, e Cong. Repr.
David-N. Mahon, A. M., M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Georgius-T. Martin, M. D.
*Carolus-N. McOoskry, M. D. Univ.
Penn., Reip. Faed. Exerc. Chir.
Georgius-W. Nabb.
*Alder Piper.
*Gulielmus-M. Sharp^M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Georgius Sweeny, e Cong. Repr.
Gulielmus Thomas.
David Wills.
13
27
*1816.
Georgius-C. Harrison, j.
Thomas-O. Kelly, A. M.
Johannes-E. Page.
Jacobus Smith.
Gulielmus Stuart.
Ross Wilkins, j, Reip. Faed. Cur.
Dist. Mich. Jurid.
6
1822.
*Thomas-R. Lee.
*Jacobus-Hall Mason.
2
1823.
Johannes-Holmes Agnew, A. M.,
S. T. D., Lingg. Graec. Rom. q.
Prof. Nov. Arc. et Coll. Wash,
et Univ. Mich.
Alfredus Armstrong, A. M.
* Georgius-W. Bethune, A. M., S.
T. D. 1823 et Univ. Penn., Sem.
Neo-Brun. Theol. Past. Prof.
*1862.
Ira-Condit Boice, A. M.
*Gulielmus Cahoone, A.M.
*Alexander-B. Codwise, A.M.
Gulielmus-L. Helfenstein, j, A. M.,
LL.D.
Jacobus Holmes, A. M., S. T. D.
Talbot Jones, j, A. M.,
Abrahamus-J. Labagh, A. M.
Isaacus-P. Labagh, A. M.
* Erskine Mason, A. M., S. T. D.
Coll. Columb., Eccl. Hist. Prof.
Ext. Acad. Theol. Nov. Ebor.
*1851.
*Daniel McKinley, A. M., S. T. D.
*1855.
Johannes-G. Morris, A.M., S. T. D.
Coll. Penn.
*Digby-D.-B. Smith, j, A. M.
�28
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Cornelius Van Cleef, A.M.
Carolus Whitehead, A. M.
Gulielmus-H. Williams, A. M.
*Johannes-C. Young, A. M.,
S. T. D. Coll. Neo-Oses. 1839, Coll.
Cent. Ky. Praeses.
*1857.
19
1824.
Gulielmus Annan, S. T. D.
*Johannes-E. Annan, A. M. Math.
Prof. Univ. Miami.
*1826.
Samuel Boyd, M. D. Coll. Med.
Nov. Ebor.
Robertus Bridges, A. M., M. B.
Univ. Penn., Coll. Pharm. Phil.
Ohim. Prof.
Gulielmus-Porter Cochran, A. M.
*Jacobus Culbertson, A.M., M.D.
Univ. Penn.
*1857.
Johannes-M. Dickey, A.M., S.T.D.
Johannes-R.-W. Dunbar, A. M.,
M. D. Univ. Penn., Anat. et
Chirur. Prof. Univ. Wash. Balt.
David Eyster, A. M.
Jacobus Knox, A. M.
*Robertus-P. Lee, A. M.
*Carolus McClure, j, A. M., e
Cong. Repr.
Samuel-A. McCosery, A.M., S.
T. D. Coll. Oolumb., Eccl. Episc.
Dios. Mich. Episcopus.
Isaacus Mcllvaine, A. M.
Samuel Montgomery, A. M.
Gulielmus-B. Norris, j, A. M.
*Jacobus Nourse, A. M.
*1855.
Andreas Parker, j, A. M., e Cong.
Repr.
*Matthceus-B. Patterson, A. M.
*Matthaeus-V. L. Ramsey.
Samuel Smith, A. M.
*Paris Spohn, A.M.
Henricus-M. Watts, j, A.M.
Moses Williamson, A. M.
24
1825.
Johannes-W. Campbell, j, A.M.
Johannes Chamberlain, A.M.
*Johannes-T.-Marshall Davie,
A.M.
*1852.
Pelatias-W. Gordon, A. M.
Gulielmus-H. Gray, A. M.
Josephus-G. Gray, A.M., M.D.
Univ. Penn.
Henricus Haverstick, A. M.
Mattliceus-H. Henderson, A. M.
Samuel-Buthford Huston, A. M., in
Graec. Mission.
Gulielmus-H. Kurtz, j, A. M., e
Cong. Repr.
Georgius-A. Lyon, A. M., S. T. D.
Samuel Maclay, A. M., M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Alexander Macbeth, j, A. M.
Johannes-W. McCulloch, A.M.
Gulielmus-B. Mcllvaine, A. M.
Johannes-C. Reynolds, A. M.
*Nicholas-G. Sharretts, A. M.
Robertus-E. Taylor, A. M.
*Georgius-S. Whitehill, A.M.
Thomas Williams, in Cong. Repr.
20
1826.
Henricus-Ludovicus Baugher,
A.M., S.T.D. 1848, Ling, et Litt.
Graec. Prof. Coll. Penn, et nune
ejusd. Praes.
*Georgius-W. Buchanan, j, A. M.,
Reip. Faed. Dist. Occid. Penn.
Attorn.
Thomas-L. Cathcart, A. M.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Thomas Craighead, A. M.
Ludovicus Eichelberger, A. M., S.
T. D.
Gulielmus-W. Gerhard, A.M., M.D.
Univ. Penn, ibique Prof.
*Adamus Gilchrist, A. M.
*1861.
Gulielmus-N. Johnston, A.M.
*Robertus-J. Poulson, A.M. *1862.
9
' 1827.
*Ricardus Armstrong, A. M., in
Sand. Inss. Mission, et Instruc.
Pub. Min.
1 Jacobus-M. Campbell, j, A. M.
*Daniel Denny, A. M.
*Petrus-H. Engle, A. M.
Sidneius-Georgius Fisher, j, A.M.
Jacobus-Hutchison Graham, j,
A.M., LL.D. 1862, Jurisp. Prof.
*Alexander Gwin, j, A. M.
*Lorenzo-N. Henderson, A. M.
Augustus-F. Hinsch, A. M.
Jacobus-M. Hopkins, A.M.
Johannes-M. Krebs, Gram. Sch.
Prim., A.M., S.T.D. 1841.
Samuel-M. Magraw, A. M.
Josephus Mahon, A. M. et Coll.
Jeff., Gr. Sch. Prine.
*Gulielmus-B. McClure, j, A. M.
*Jacobus-X. McLanahan, j, A. M.,
e Cong. Repr.
*1862.
Gulielmus-V. Neill, A. M.
Gulielmus-M. Nevin, A. M. Ling.
Lat. Prof. Fran, et Mar. Coll.
Johannes-H. Price, j, A. M.
Daniel-M. Smyser, j, A.M.
Matthaeus Spencer, A. M.
*Alexander-M.tSterritt, j, A.M.
Franciscos West, A. M., M. D.
Univ. Penn.
22
29
1828.
*Jacobus-G. Brackenridge, A. M.
Madison Brown, j, Faed. Cur. Jurid.
Ter. Neb.
*Robertus Bryson, A. M.
-Eefoardus-Pountj Buchanan,KM.
*Jacobus Burnside, j, A.M. *1861.
Gulielmvs-H. Campbell, A. M.,
S.T.D., Sem. Theol. Neo-Brun.
Heb. Prof., Coll. Rutg. Praes.
Thomas Creigli, A. M., S. T. D.
Robertus Davidson, A. M.,
S.T.D., Univ. Tenn. Praes.
*Benjamin Gerhard, j, A. M.
*Johannes-A. Gray.
Augustus-Otto Hiester, j, A. M.
*Johannes-C. Jenkins, A.M., M.D.
Univ. Penn.
Jacobus-Miller McKim, A.M.
Josephus-C. Neid6, A. M.
Benjamin Patton, j, A. M. e
Cong. Repr.
Samuel Pollock, M.D. Univ. Penn.
*Edvardus Ritchie.
*Baker-J. Ross.
*Gulielmus-J. Thompson, A.M.
Jacobus Vanhorn, A.M.
Nathan-G. White, A. M.
21
1829.
David Agnew.
Johannes-R. Agnew.
Robertus Birch, A.M. Yal.
*Jacobus-Hall Bready, A. M.
Josephus Briggs.
Andreas-B. Buchanan.
Thomas-K. Bull, A. M.
*Thomas-A. Carothers.
Jacobus-K. Davidson, M.D. Univ.
Penn.
�30
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Gulielmus-H. Davis.
Thomas Forster.
Ludovicus-W. Foulke, M. D. Univ.
Mar., A. M.
*Carolus-Franciscus Himes.
Gulielmus-J. Holmes, M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Edvardus C. Humes.
Johannes-A. Inglis.
*Cyrus-H. Jacobs.
*1836.
*Jacobus-Franciscus Latta, M. D.
Univ. Penn.
*1862.
*Edvardus-J. Lowrey.
Samuel McCulloch.
Johannes-C. McKinney.
Robertus McClelland, Reip.Mich.
Gub., Reip. Fsed.. Sec. Int.
Gulielmus-S. McPherson, A. M.,
M. D. Univ. Penn.
Philippus-N. Meade.
Hiester-Henricus Muhlenberg,
1831.
*Jacobus-W. Bell.
Gulielmus-Steel Bishop, A. M.
*Gulielmus-S. Frisby.
Thomas-Bently Jacobs.
*Armstrong McGinnis.
5
1837.
Gulielmus-M. Baird, j, A.M.
Thomas Bowman, A.M., S.T.D.
Ohio Wes. Univ. 1853, Univ.
Asciburg. Prseses.
Edvardus-Anderson Lesley, j, A. M.
Josua-Albertus Massey, A. M.
*Gulielmus-Brown Parker, A. M.
*1862.
Joshua Sweet, A. M., S. T. D. alibi.
*Johannes Zug, Tutor, A. M.,
LL. B. 1840.
7
M. D. Univ. Penn., A. M.
1838.
Gulielmus-F. Nelson.
Benjamin-M. Nyce.
Albertus-Brown Clark.
Jacobus-O. Palmer.
Carolus Denison, j, in Cong. Repr.
Johannes-B. Patterson.
Georgius-Purnell Fisher, j, Att.
Jacobus-A. Slaymaker.
Gen. et Sec. Pol. Reip. Del., e
*Johannes-Christian Spayd, M.D.
Cong. Repr., Feed. Cur. Dam.
Univ. Penn.
J urid.
Isaacus Van Bibber.
32 *Edvardus-Emilius Leclerc, j.
Benjamin-Addison Massey.
Thomas-Verner Moore, A.M. Tu
1830.
tor, S. T. D. 1853.
Carolus-Wesley Pitman, j, e
Henricus Aurand, A. M.
Cong. Repr.
*Jacobus Bell.
Alfredus Creigh, j, A.M., LL.D. Josephus-Clubine Rhodes, j, A. M.
Amos Slaymaker, j.
Univ. Kent. 1862.
Jacobus-R. Irvine, A. M., M. D. Jacobus-McFarlane Thompson,
M. D. Univ. Penn.
Univ. Penn.
Gulielmus-Smith Waters, Tutor,
Johannes-L. McKim.
A. M., LL. B. 1842.
Johannes Owens.
6
�31
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Georgius-Alexander Coffey, j, A.M.,
Gulielmus-Ryland Woodward,
Reip. Faed. Att. Ori. Dist. Penn.
LL. B. Harv. 1842.
Johannes-Armstrong Wright. 13 Georgius-Ricardus Crooks, A. M.,
S.T. D. 1857.
* Georgius-Bowman Denison, A.M.
1839.
*Uenricus-Mandeville Denison,
A.M.
Samuel Baird, A. M.
Daniel-Elzey-Moore Bates, j, A.M. David-G. Eshleman, j, A. M.
Jacobus-Dundas Biddle, A. M.
Samuel-Georgius Hare, A.M.
Gulielmus-Henricus Butler, A. M. Samuel-Alexander Harrison, A. M.,
Carolus-Manning-Force Deems,
M. D. Univ. Penn.
A. M.,S.T. D. Coll. R. M. et Prof. Ricardus-Beale McAllister, j, A.M.
Jacobus-Gilbreath Hamilton, A.M. *Henricus-Augustus Muhlen
Jacobus-Alfredus Inness, A. M.
berg, A.M., e Cong. Repr. *1854.
* Gulielmus Lyon, A. M.
*1862. Carolus O’Neill, j, A.M., in Cong.
Johannes Lyon, A. M.
Repr.
Arthurus- Wellington Milby, A. M. Johannes Phillips, A. M.
Johannes-Proctor Officer, A. M. Johannes-Mansfield Sims, A.M.
Abrahamus-Herr Smith, j, A. M.
1857.
Gulielmus-Fletcher Roe, j, A. M. Jacobus-Norton Temple, A. M.
19
1855, Lingg. Ant. Shelb. Coll., Jacobus Wallace, j, A. M.
Lingg. Ant. et Log. et Metaphys.
Mand. Coll., Lingg. Rec. El.
Fem. Coll. Prof.
Jacobus-Brown Scouller, A.M.
Lemuel Todd, j, A.M., e Cong.
Repr.
*Gulielmus Toy, A. M.
*Georgius-Ross Veazey, j, A.M.
Thomas Wright, j, A. M.
17
1840.
Clemens-Edvinus Babb, A. M.
Edmundus-Burke Babb, A. M.
Spencer-Fullerton Baird, A. M.,
M. D., D. P. S. 1856, Chim. et
Phil. Nat. Prof., Smith. Inst.
Sec. Adj.
Johannes-Franciscus Bird, A. M.,
M. D. Univ. Penn.
1841.
Carolus-Josephus Baker, A. M.
Benjamin-FranklinBrooke, A. M.
David-Evans Bruner, A. M.
Georgius-Griffin Butler, A M.
Gulielmus-Brown Carr, A. M., Coll.
Rand. Mac. Lingg. Ant. Prof.
Georgius-David Cummins, A. M.,
S. T. D. Coll. Neo. Caes. 1857.
Albertus-Troup Emory, j.
Henricus-BakerHarnsburger, A.M.
Georgius-Washington Knox, j,
A.M.
Jacobus Lesley, A. M.
Ricardus-Van-Boskick Lincoln,
A. M.
Thomas-Edvinus Massey, A. M.
*Benjamin-Morsell McConkey,
A.M.
*
�32
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Carson-Courtland Moore, j.
Banister-Gibson Peacock, A. M.
Johannes-Henricus Reed, A. M.
Wilson-Lee Spottswood, A. M.
Johannes-Keagy Stayman, A.M.,
Lingg. Lat. et Gal. Prof.
Gulielmus-Henricus Stewart, j.
Edvardus Stout, A. M.
Carolus-Henricus Tilghman.
Augustus-Baker Tizzard, A. M.
Gulielmus-Ryland White, A. M.
23
Robertus McPherson.
Robertus-Henricus Pattison, A. M.
Jonas-Johannes Potts, A. M.
Josias Snow, A. M.
Gulielmus-Lebbeus Whitney, j,
A.M.
Leonardus Woodward, A. M.
Gulielmus-Smith Young.
14
1844.
Grafton-Marsh Bosley, A.M., M.D.
Johannes-Davis Boswell, A.M.
Henricus-Donnell, j.
1842.
Jacobus-Morrill Follansbee, A.M.
Alexander-Blain Anderson, j, A. M.
Univ. Soule Prof.
Johannes-Summerfield Battee,
*Johannes-Stansbury Gorsuch,
M.D.
A. M.
*1852—29.
Ricardus-Ridgely Battee, j, A. M.
* Gulielmus-Armstrong Graham,
Perry-Gardner Buckingham.
A. M.
*1857—33.
Jonathan-E. Bulkley, A. M.
Ebenezer-Denny Harding, A. M.
Gulielmus-Rufus Creery, A. M.
Diego-Johannes-Miller Loop, A. M.
Archer-Gifford Miller.
Perley-Ray Lovejoy, A. M. Univ.
*Robertus-Frazer Morris.
Newt. Prof.
Johannes-Ricardus Pattison, A.M.
Josephus-Henricus Martin, A.M.
*Thomas-W.-P. Rider, M.D.
Georgius-Hankins McCabe, j, A.M.
Carolus-P. Wilkins, A. M.
Alfredus-Brunson McCalmont, j.
Benjamin-F. Wright.
12
IsaiasWillis McCord, A.M.
Thomas-Brown Parker, j, A. M.
Gulielmus-M. Penrose, j.
1843.
Samuel-Jacobus Powell.
Ricardus-Hughlett Bryan, A. M.
OtisSenricus Tiffany, A.M., S. T.
Joliannes-Franciscus Chaplain,
D. 1858, Math. Prof.
17
A.M.
Isaac Dillon, A. M.
1845.
Johannes-Lyttleton Harmanson,
Gulielmus-Donland Agnew.
M.D.
Warren Holden, A. M. 1861, Coll. *Johannes-Ha.ys Blair.
Johannes Carson,-j, A. M.
Gir. Math. Prof.
Robertus-Alexander Lamberton, j, Jacobus-Wallace Duncan, j.
A.M.
Josephus Dysart, A.M.
Jacobus R. Finch, A. M.
Washington Lee, j, A. M.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
*Georgius-Willis Foulke, A. M.,
M.D.
*Jacobus-Biddle Gordon, j, A.M.
Johannes Gracy.
Samuel-Henricus Griffith, A. M.
Robertus-Miller Henderson, j,
A. M.
David Knox.
Robertus-Samuel Maclay, A. M.,
Miss, in Chin.
*Johannes McClure.
Josephus Benson McEnally,j, A.M.
*Johannes-Horace Stevens, A. M.
*1860.
Carolus-Henderson Stinson, j.
Isaac-Newton Urner, A.M. 1855,
Coll. Miss. Praeses.
18
1846.
Johannes-Davenport BtackweU,
A. M.
Gulielmus-Plummer Bird, A. M.,
M. D. Univ. Md.
Carolus-Mifflin Boyd, A. M.
*Carolus-Henricus Brown, A. M.
Stephanus-Tilton Brown, A. M.
Robertus-Laurenson Dashiel,ANL
*J acobus-Andreas Devinney, A.M.,
Gram. Sch. Prim.
*1852—32.
Alexander-Severus Gibbons, A. M.
Carolus Hall.
J ohannes-Gulielmus-Fletcher
Hank, M. D. Univ. Penn., A. M.
1859.
*Jacob-Brandt Keller, A. M.
Johannes-Roberts Kennaday, j,
A.M.
Ricardus-Alexander-F. Penrose,
A. M., M. D., Obst. Univ. Penn.
Prof.
Johannes-Arthur Phelps.
3
33
Alfredus-Gulielmus Sims.
*Beverly-Roberts Waugh, A. M.
*1861—38.
16
1847.
Carolus-Wesleius Carrigan, j.
Wesleius Cochran, A. M.
*Gulielmus Field,j, A.M.
Josephus-Lord Gates.
Norman Hall.
Jehu-Newman Hank, Huntsv. Fem.
Coll. Prof, et vice Praes.
Johannes-Lemon Harper.
*Samuel Levis.
DeWitt-Clinton Lloyd, j, A. M.
Jacobus-Andreas McCauley, A. M.
Carolus-Jacobus-Thompson McIn
tire, j, A. M.
Johannes Mitchel Robinson, j.
Moses Walton, j.
Edvinus-Hanson Webstee, A. M.
in Cong. Repr.
Samuel-C. Wingard, j.
15
1848.
Thomas-Montgomery Biddle, A. M.
Gulielmus-Laws Boswell, A. M.,
Nov. Arc. Coll, et Gen. Coll.
Lingg'. Graec. et. Lat. Prof.,
Math., Lingg. Graec. et Germ.
Prof.
Johannes-Neff Coombs, A. M. 1851.
JOHANNES-AnDEEAS JACKSON CrESwell, j, A.M. 1851, in Cong.
Repr.
Henricus-Clay Dallam, j.
Gulielmus Daniel, j, A. M.
Johannes Summerfield Deale, A.M.
Johannes Greenbank.
*Jacobus-Bernardus Hank.
�34
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Garrick-Mallery Harding, j.
Henricus-Martyn Harman, A. M.
J ohannes-Wesleius Heisley, j, A. M.
Gulielmus Ing, A. M.
*Carolus-Gulielmus Keesee, A. M.
Franciscus-Alexander Macartney,
j, A.M.
Jacobus-Gulielmus Marshall, A. MLingg. antiq., Lingg. Lat. et Gall.
Prof.
Benardus-Harrison Nadal, A. M.
Hon. Caus. Eod. An., S. T. D.
1857, Univ. Asciburg. Phil, et
Rhet. Prof.
Jacobus-Gulielmus Nicholls.
Elijah-Barrett Prettyman, A. M.
1853.
Samuel-Aaron Rawlings, j, A. M.
Jacobus-Groves Sewell.
Benjamin-Franklin Snow, A. M.,
Ill. Wes. Univ. Ling. Lat. Prof.
Thomas-Snowden Thomas, A. M.
Johannes Wilson, A. M. Wes. Fem.
Coll. Praeses.
Henricus-Merryman Wilson, A.M.,
M.D.
Johannes-Ogden Winner, A. M.
Archib aldus-Wesleius Wright,
A.M., M. D.
Carolus-Bedford Young, A-. M. 28
Samuel-Alexander Graham, j, A. M.
Thomas-Talbot Hutchins, j, A. M.
Johannes-Jeremias Jacob, A. M.
1854.
Johannes-Henricus Kauffman.
Georgius-DeBonneville Keim, j.
Caleb-Burwell-Rowan Kennerly,
A.M.
Nathaniel-T.-C. Lupton, A. M.
Johannes-Gulielmus Medairy, j,
A.M.
Marcus-Junius Parrot, j, e Cong.
Deleg. e Terr. Kans.
Henricus-Bascom Ridgaway,A.M.
Henricus-Gere Smith.
Jacobus-Henricus Thomas, A. M.,
M. D.
Georgius-Washington Waesche.
Johannes-Henricus Watters, M. D.,
Sane. Lud. Med. Coll. Phys, et
Med. Jurisp. Prof.
21
1850.
Flavel-Clingan Barber, A. M. 1854.
Jesse-Gulielmus Barrett, A.M. 1859.
*Josua-Soule Bowman, j.
*1853Jacohus-McHenry Caldwell, A. M.
Benjamin-Davenport Chenoweth, j.
Josephus-Conner Collinson, A.M.
Jacobus-Basil Duke.
1849.
Gulielmus-Thomas Gough.
Alexander-McNutt Hamilton.
Alfredus-Augustus-Heno Ames,
Arminius-Summerfield Hank.
A.M., M.D.
Jonathan-Perrv Harrison, A. M.
Chapman-Vinson Brooks.
Ricardus-Gassaway Chaney, A.M. Samuel-Dickinson Hillman, A. M.
1851 lion, caus., Gram. Sch. Prim.,
Gulielmus-Daniel Conn, j.
Moncure-Daniel Conway, re. M
Math. Prof.
Gulielmus-Jacobus Hiss, A. M.
Johannes-Redman Coxe, j, A. M.
Phil-Moore Leakin.
Georgius Duffield, A. M.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Gulielmus-Jacobvs Maclay,
A.M. 1854, Univ. Pacif. Praes.
Johannes-Gideon Markle.
Arcliibaldus-Gifford Marlatt,
A.M. Univ. Wes., Irv. Fem.
Coll. Praes.
Samuel-Ricardus Peale, j.
Samuel-Henricus Reynolds, A. M.
Granville-Ross Rider.
Ricardus-DQrsey Sellman.
Ludovicus-Griffith Sparrow, M.D.
Dugald Thompson.
Carolus-Comfort-Tiffany, A. M.
Gulielmus- Van-Bergan Tudor,
A.M.
Simpson-Talbot Van-Sant, j, A. M.
Gulielmus-Carlile Wilson, A. M.,
Nat. Sci. Prof.
27
35
1852.
Henricus Anderson, M. D.
Jacobus-Taylor Carlile.
Theodorus-M. Carson.
Thomas-Green Chattie, M. D.
Georgius-Jacobus Conner, A. M.,
1860.
Reuben-B. Dietrick, A. M.
Gulielmus-Lutherus Haller.
Ulysses Hobbs, j. A.M.
Christianus-Philippus Humrich, j.
Carolus-Brown Lore, j.
*Jethro-Gorsuch Lynch, M. D.
Thomas-Lyttle ton Lyon, A. M.
Johannes McCarty.
*Theophilus-Norman McCeney, j.
*Samuel-H. Peach, j.
Jonathan-Knowles Peck, A.M.
1861.
'
1851.
Ralph Pierce, A. M., Miss, ad Ind.
Johannes-Maxwell Bailey, A. M.
Thomas Sherlock, A. M.
Georgius-Ricardus Bibb.
Gulielmus-Andreas Snively, A. M.
Johannes-Price Clark, A.M. 1858. Johannes Weller, j, A. M.
Georgius-Banghart Day, A. M.
Josephus-Blake Wilson.
21
Israel-Smyser Diehl, A. M. 1856.
Decius-Wadsworth Edmonston,
1853.
A.M.
Gulielmus-Henricus Engel, A. M. Johannes-Wesleius Awl, j, A. M.,
Jacobus-Munroe Kimberlin, Univ.
1857.
Pacf. Lingg. Antiq. Prof.
Johannes-Emory Clawson, A. M.,
Georgius-Henricus Lowe.
M.D.
Gulielmus-Bumgardner McGilvray, *Jonathan-Jacobus Melson, A. M.
A.M.
*1858—25.
Amos-Forry Musselman, Tutor, j, Gulielmus-Cyrus Rheem, j, A. M.
Agib Ricketts, j, A. M.
A.M.
Philippus Myers, j, A. M.
Albertus Ritchie, j, A. M.
Daniel-F. Rohrer.
Caleb-Sipple Pennewill.
Gulielmus-Carolus-F. Reed, A. M. Augustus Marion Sawyer, j, A. M.
Martin-Thomas Rohrer.
Edmundus-Bayley Seymour, j, A.M.
Jacobus-Sewall Thomas
16 Jacobus-Mitchell Shearer, A. M.,
M. D.
io
�36
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1854.
Carolus-Franciscus Himes, A.M.,
Univ. Troj. Math. Prof.
Nathaniel-Garland Keirle, M. D.,
A. M. 1863.
Josias-Forrest Kennedy, A. M.,
M. D. Univ. Penn., Reip. Fsed.
exerc. Chir.
Joliannes-Moore Leonard, A. M„,
Univ. Orient. Tenn. Lingg. Re
cent. Prof.
Sewell-Taylor Milbourne, j, A.M.
Johannes-A. Munroe, A. M.
Georgius-Philippus Rhinehart.
Augustus-S. Sassaman, A. M.
Henricus-Robinson Torbert, j, A.M.
Johannes-Southgate Tucker, A. M.
1860, Univ. Misso. Prof.
Jacobus-Douglass Wade.
Henricus-Young Weems.
Archibaldus-Georgius Wilson.
Thomas Wilson, A. M.
23
Benjamin Arbogast, A. M.
Gulielmus-Jacob us Bowdle, A.M.,
M.D.
Noah Bowlus, j.
*Samuel-Gulielmus Emory, j, A. M.
*1862—29.
Nehemiah Fountain.
Georgius-Tankard Garrison, A. M.
Asher-Davidson Gibson.
Otis Gibson, A. M. 1860, Miss,
in Chin.
Ferdinandus-Jacobus-Samuel Gorgas, A. M.
Gulielmus-Duffield Halbert, j.
Johannes-Loren Heysinger, A. M.
Johannes-Fletcher Hurst, A. M.
1858.
Johannes Peach, M.D.
Josephus-Benson Perrie, A. M.
Henricus-Hamilton Pfeiffer.
Jacobus-Fowler Rusling, j, A. M.
1856.
Alfredus-Christopher Stone.
David-Harrison Walton.
*Gulielmus-R. Aldred, A. M.
Marcus White, A. M.
20
*1862—33.
Rignal-W. Baldwin, j.
Isaacus-D. Clark, A. M.
Marvinus-Emory Clark, j, A. M.
1855.
Samuel-Middleton Dickson, A.M.
-Noel Eccleston.
E.
Gulielmus-Tell Barnitz, A. M.
Johannes-Calhoun Gilmore, A. M.
Jacobus-Hervey Barton, A. M.
Gulielmus-W. Harnsberger.
Shadrach-Leacock Bowman.
Andreas-Hemphill Dill, j, A. M. Jacobus-Edvardus-D. Jester.
Jacobus-Pede Marshall, A. M.
1859.
Gulielmus-Henricus Eckels, j, A.M. Gulielmus-M. Parsons, A. M.
Johannes-Robertus Effinger, A. M. Jacobus-F. Purvis, A. M.
1859.
Adamus-F. Townsend, A. M.
Jacobus-W. Troxel, A.M.
Thompson-Prettyman Ege, A. M.
Gulielmus-B. Walston.
Ludovicus-McKendree Griffith.
*Cyrus-Franklinus Gulden. *1357—27. Jacobus-D. Waters.
�OATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1857.
Cornelius-Fletcher Barnes, A. M.
1862.
Gustavus-Claggett Bird.
Gulielmus- W. Brim, A. M.
Daniel-S. Burns, A. M.
Thomas-Nelson Conrad, A. M.
Georgius-W. D. Davis, A.M.
O.-Irving Ditty, j.
Gulielmus-H. Effinger, j.
Franciscus-S. Findlay.
Valentinus Friese, A.M.
Edvinus-Lycurgus Griffith.
Johannes Hays, j.
*Owen Johnson.
*1858—22.
Samuel-J. Jones, A.M., M.D. Univ.
Penn., Reip. Faed. Nav. Chir.
Georgius-B. Keen.
Gulielmus-Fletcher Perrie, A.M.
Benjamin-Franklin Pursel, j.
Josephus-Culbertson Snively.
Andreas-Jackson Wilcox, j.
19
1858.
Josephus-Benson Akers, A. M.
Robertus-Newton Baer.
Silas-Benson Best, A. M.
Jacobus-Iverson Boswell.
Josephus-E. Broadwater.
Johannes-C. Brooking, A. M.
Samuel-Cushman Caldwell, j.
Thomas Care.
Daniel-Mountjoy Cloud.
Philippus-W. Downes, j.
Jacobus-Kent Dukes.
Robertus-Newton Earhart.
Daniel-Webster Friese.
Gulielmus-Henricus Getzendaner,j.
Marcus-Lucius Gordon.
Henricus-Dorsey Gough.
16
37
Thomas-Morris Griffith, A. M.
Gulielmus-Hamilton Griffith, A. M.
*Samuel-O. Hopkins, A.M., M.D.
*1862—27.
*Jennings-Marion- Clarke Hulsey,
*1862—28.
Horatio-Collins King, j, A.M. 1863.
Johannes-Henricus Leas, A. M.
Benjamin- Crispinus Lippincott,
A. M.
Joshua Allen Lippincott, A.M.
Carolus-E. Maglaughlin, j.
Henricus Marriott, M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Johannes-H. Martin, M.D.
Samuel-M. McPherson, M. D. Univ.
Penn.
Alfredus - Foster Mullin, A. M.,
Gram. Sch. Prine.
Thomas-Sargent Reese, A. M.
Albertus-H. Slape, j.
Gulielmus-Jacobus Stevenson.
Gulielmus- Theophilus-Lofthouse
Weech.
Johannes-J. White.
Josephus-P. Wright, A. M., M.D.,
Reip. Feed. Mil. Chir.
35
1859.
Daniel-A. Beckley.
Jeremias-Howard Beckwith, A. M.
1863.
Gulielmus-Emory-Fisk Deal, A. M.
*Zebulon Dyer.
*1862—25.
Alexander-Hemphill Ege, A. M.
David-Clarke John.
Georgius-Whitefield John, Univ.
Asciburg. Lingg. Recent. Prof.
Samuel-L. Lupton, A. M. 1863.
*Gulielmus-Wallace Merrick.
*1862—24.
�38
CATALOGUS DIOKINSONIENSIS.
Isaacus-Brown Parker, A. M.
Thomas-Sargent Parker, j, A.M.
1863.
Jacobus-J. Patterson.
Clayton-O. Penuel.
Jacobus-Alexander-Ventress Pue.
Duke Slavens.
David D. Stone.
Joshua-Dorsius Warfield.
David-Stone Woods.
Johannes-Wesleius Wright.
Georgius-Henricus Zimmerman,
A.M.
20
Petrus-H. Whisner.
Seth-Hart Yocum.
24
1861.
Jacobus-Glasgow Archer.
Jacobus Barton, j.
Henricus-Clay Cheston, A. M.
1863, Gr. Sch. Prim.
Carolus-Henricus Gere.
Elbridge-Hoffman Gerry, M. D.
Gulielmus-Franciscus Godwin,
M.D.
Henricus-Harrison Gregg.
Levi Haverstick.
Gulielmus-Henricus Maxwell.
Johannes-Edvardus McCahan.
1860.
Thomas-Jefferson McOants.
*Henricus-Stoner Munroe. *1861—24.
Henricus- Winslow Abbott.
Benjamin-Franklin Ball.
Carolus-Wesleius Neff.
Georgius Baylor.
Franciscus-Benjamin Sellers.
Philippus-A.-H. Brown.
Carolus-R. Snyder.
David-B. Bruner, A.M.
Johannes-Brown Storm.
*Gulielmus-Laws Cannon. *1863—24. Gulielmus-Henricus Zimmerman.
Georgius-B. Creamer.
17
Jacobus-L. Crook.
Hugo-A. Curran.
1862.
Merritt Eckman.
Jacobus-Valentinus Gotwaltz.
Johannes-Horatius Buckner.
Johannes-H. Grabill.
Thomas-Morris Chaney.
Thomas-Morris Gunn, A.M.
Wilmer Coffman.
Carolus Heydrick.
Gulielmus-Oliver Cornman.
Amos-Preston Gilbert.
Olarentius-G. Jackson, j.
Johannes-Weslieus Landis, j, A. M. Martinus-Christianus Herman.
Josephus-Benson Parker, A.M.,
Jacobus-Henricus Loomis.
M. D., Reip. Feed. Nav. Chir.
Daniel-Webster McCurdy.
Jacobus-W. Sanders.
Isaacus McCurley.
Georgius-Troxel Motter.
Rufus-Edmondus Shapley, j.
Gulielmus-Miller Ogilby.
J.-Lester Shipley.
Alfredus-Newton Weir.
Ricardus-Southron Shreve.
Gulielmus-Princeton Willey.
13
Johannes-S. Stamm.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1863.
39
1864.
ADSECTURI GRADUM ANNO CURRENTE.
Gulielmus-Reed Cisna.
Asburius-Jones Clarke.
Gulielmus-Daily Clayton.
Georgius-Nathaniel Glover.
Johannes-Criswell Graham.
Jacobus Hart.
Henricus-Francis Isett.
Thomas-Baltzell Long.
Leander Makely.
Gulielmus-Leander McDowell.
Ben-Pulaski McIntyre.
Edvinus-Franklinus Pitcher.
Henricus-Clay Speake.
Augustinus Bierbower.
Sebastianus Brown.
Albertus-Tayler Canfield.
Jacobus-Smith Elliott.
Gulielmus Hamilton.
Johannes Hood.
Henricus-Quincy Keyworth.
Gulielmus-David Luckenbach.
Moses-Allen Points.
Niles-Harrison Shearer.
Gulielmus-Sylvanus Smith.
Theodorus-Tyler Wing.
13
Josephus-B. Zeigler.
12
�CATA10GUS
LEGUM BACCALAUREORUM,
QUI SINGULIS ANNIS PRO MERITO LAUREATI SUNT.
Jacobus-H. Bull.
Jonathan-K. Cooper, A.B. Coll.
J.-N. McAllister.
Jeff.
Gulielmus-P. Orbison, A. B. Coll.
Jonathan-K earsley Henderson,
Jeff.
A. B. Coll. Jeff.
1836.
Jacobus-M. Johnson.
Jacobus-H. Carter.
Gulielmus-C. Lawson.
Hiatt-P. Hepburn.
Alexander Ramsey.
Hugo-W. Reynolds, A. B. Coll.
1837.
Jeff.
A.-Adams Anderson, A. B. Coll.
Thomas-C. Sharp.
Jeff.
Nathan-B. Smithers, A. B. Coll.
Andreas-Gregg Curtin, Reip.
La Fay.
Penn. Gub.
Gulielmus-M. Stewart, A.B. tloll.
Robertus-A. McMurtrie, A.B. Coll.
Jeff.
Jeff.
Johannes Zug, A. B. 1837.
Alfredus Nevin, A. B. Coll. Jeff.
1834, S. T. D. Coll. Laf. 1858.
1835.
1841.
Gulielmus-Smith Waters, A. B.
1838.
1838.
-E. Bailey, A. B. Coll. Jeff.
F.
Edgar-B. Wakeman, A. M.
F.-W. Hughes.
*1862.
Johannes-Jacob Myers,
M. D. *Gulielmus-B. Knox.
Univ. Wash. Balt.
1839.
1842.
Thomas Wright.
Carroll Spense.
Josephus-S. Dillenger.
Jacobus-M. Duncan, A.B. Coll.
Neo-Ctees.
1843.
Johannes-Brown Parker, A. B.
Gulielmus-H. Lamberton.
Univ. Penn.
1840.
*J.-Ellis Bonham.
Johannes Breitenback.
1846.
Henricus-Edgar Keene.
Johannes-Penn Brooke.
�LAUREATI
QUI ALIBI INSTITUTI FUERUNT VEL APUD NOS GRADU
HONORARIO SUNT DONATI.
1810.
1789.
*Robertus Cunningham, A. B.
*Alexander-W. Martin, A.B.
1790.
2
*Jacobus McCormick, Math, et
Phil. Nat. Prof., A. M.
1814.
*Nathaniel-R. Snowden, Coll. Neo. *Gulielmus Watson, A.M.
Caes. 1787, A. M., Curat. *1850.
1816.
1792.
Samuel-Brown Wylie, Prof. Heb.
Graec. et Rom. Lingg. Univ.
. *Robertus Cooper, Coll. Neo. Caes.
Penn., S.T.D.
1763, S.T.D.
*1797.
*Johannes King, S.T.D.
1823.
*Jacobus McCormick, Tut. A. B.,
1810 A. M., Math, et Phil. Nat. *Adamus Hays, A.M., M.D. Univ.
Penn.
Prof.
*Phtlippus Lindsly, Neo. Caes.
*Samuel-Eusebius Maccorkle, Coll.
1804 et A. M. ibique Tut. Lingg.
Neo. Caes. 1772, S.T.D. *isn.
Prof, et Vice-Praes., S. T. D.,
Jacobus Waddell, S.T. D.
5
Univ. Nash. Prteses., in Acad.
Theol. Nov. Alb. Jud. Archaeol.
1800.
Bibl. et Polit. Eccl. Prof. *1855.
Robertus Black, S. T. D.
2
1806.
1824.
Paulus Immel Hettick, A. M.
* Thomas Scott, S.T.D.
1808.
Jacobus-R. Butler, A. B.
1826.
Johannes Buchanan, LL. D., Cur.
Sup. Reip. Md. Jurid. Prine.
�42
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
Thomas Duncan, LL.D., Cur. Sup.
Reip. Penn. Jurid.
Ricardus-Henricus Lee, 1812, A.M.
*Jacobus McGraw, S. T. D.
Gulielmus Paxton, S. T. D.
*Johannes Sargeant, Neo. Caes.
1795 et A.M., LL.D, et Cone.
1822 et Harv. 1844, e Cong.
Repr., ad Panam. Conv. Amer.
Legatus.
*1852.
6
1827.
1831. •
*Jacobus-C. Biddle, A. M.
Alexander McLeod, A. M.
Jacobus Schoonmaker, S. T. D.
Rogerus Brooke Taney, 1796,
LL.D.
4
1839.
Franciscus Hodgson, A.M., S.T.D.
Del. Coll.
Reverdy Johnson, LL. D., Reip.
Faed. Sen.
2
1840.
David Kirkpatrick, A. M.
Johannes Vethake, Chem. Prsel., *Thomas-Emory Sudler, A. M.,
Acad. Mil. Reip. Faed. ibique
A. M., M. D., Chem. Prof. Univ.
Math. Prof., Math. Coll. Sanet.
Wash. Balt.
2
Johan, et Dick. Coll. Prof.
1828.
Josephus-A. Maybin, A. M.
1841.
*Johannes-A. Collins, A. M.
Edvardtts Cooke, Univ. Wes.'
1838., A.M. et Univ. Wes., S.T.D.
1829.
Coll. McKend, 1854, et Harv.
R.- W. Cushman, A. M.
1855., Univ. Laurent. Praes.
Alexander McFarland, A. M.
2 Jacobus Floy, A.M., S.T.D. Univ.
Wes. 1847.
JohannesM. Krebs, S. T. D. 1827.
1830.
4
Edvardus-H. Barton, A. M., M. D.
1842.
Univ. Penn.
Alexander McClelland, A. M. Coll. Jacobus Buchanan, 1809, LL. D.
Neo. Caes. et Cone., S. T. D. et Lutherus Kidder, A. M.
■ Cone., Rhet. Metaphys. Eth. q. Gulielmus Kingston, A.M., Math.
Viet. Coll. Prof.
Prof., Lingg. Rutg. Coll. Prof.,
et in Acad. Theol. Nov. Bruns. Howard Malcolm, A. M. et Univ.
Brun. 1827, Cone. S.T.D. etUniv.
Crit. Bibl. Prof.
Virid. 1843., Georgiop. Coll, et
Gulielmus-H. Price, A.M.
Univ. Ludob.Praes.,LL.D. Univ.
Johannes Reed, LL.D., Coll. ^Vash.
Ludob. 1857.
Leg. Prof.
4
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
43
Robertus Newton, S.T.D. etUniv. Gulielmus-M. Harvard, A. M.
West. 1843.
5 Hugh-Holmes McGuire, A. M.
Henricus-Graham McGuire, A. M.
Bernardus-Harrison Nodal, 1848,
1843.
A.M.
6
* Georgius- W. Bethune. 1823, S.
T. D.
*1862.
Gulielmus-Balthrop Edwards,
1849.
A. M.
Robertus-S. Ashby, A. M.
Edmundus-S. Janes, A. M.
J. L. Kemp, A. M., Math. Univ. Henricus Hickok, A. M.
Josephus-Asbury Morgan, A.M.
Trans. Adj. Prof.
3
J. N. McLeod, S.T.D.
5
1844.
1850.
Johannes-H. Dashiel, A. M.
Gulielmus Arthur, A. M.
Thomas Jackson, S. T. D.
*L ucien- W. Berr 7, S. T. D., Univ.
Elmundus-S. Janes, A. M. 1843,
Ascib. et Univ. Misso. Praeses.
*1861.
S. T. D.
Eccl. Meth. Episc.
Gulielmus Pennington Burgess,
Episcopus.
* Gulielmus Wicks, S. T. D. *is62.
A.M.
3
4
1845.
Gulielmus-H. Gilder, A. M.
Ricardus-A. Morgan, S. T. D.
C.-C. Van-Arsdale,S.T.B.
1847.
1851.
Carolus Collins, Univ. Wes.1837
et A.M., S.T.D., Coll. Em. et
3
Hen. atq. Coll. Dick, et Coll.
Fem. Tenn. Praeses.
Job R. Tyson, LL.D.
2
Johannes Beecham, S. T. D.
Henricus Brewerton, LL. D., Supt.
et Comt. Acad. Mil. Reip. Faed.
1852.
Edvardus Neville, S. T. D.
Osmon-Cleander Baker, A. M.
Josephus Salkeld, A.M.
4
Univ. Wes. 1837, S. T. D. et Univ.
Wes., in Acad. Theol. Cone. Neo1848.
Hant. Prof, et Praeses, Eccl.
Meth. Episc. Episcopus.
Henricus-L. Baugher, 1826,
Johannes P. Gray, M. D., A. M.
S.T.D.
Alexander-Crawford Donaldson, Samuel-Dickinson Hillman, 1850,
A.M.
3
A.M.
�44
CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1853.
A. B. Ivins, A. M.
Johannes-R. Jarboe, A. M.
Thomas-Verner Moore, 1838,
S.T.D.
1854.
Georgius-Ricardus Crooks, 1840,
S. T. D.
Gulielmus Elliott, A. M.
Bernardus-Harrison Nadal, 1848,
S. T.D.
3
Conway-Phelps Wing, Coll. Ham.
1828, S. T. D.
5
Ricardus-Henricus Lee, 1812,
1858.
LL.D.
Nelson Rounds, Coll. Cone. 1830,
Gulielmus Butler, S. T. D., Miss, in
A. M. Univ. Wes. 1833, S. T. D.
Ind.
2
Robertus-Daniel Chambers, A. M.
1855.
Alfredus Cookman, A. M.
*Gulielmtjs Darlington, M. D., Gulielmus Cox, S. T. D.
e Cong. Repr., LL. D. Yal. 1848, Gulielmus-H. Goodwin, S. T. D.
D. P. S.
*1863-80. Littleton-F. Morgan, S. T. D.
Thomas Daugherty, M. D., A. M. Isaacus- W. Wiley, M. D., A. M.,
Stearns Patterson, A. M., Wilm.
Miss, in China.
7
Fem. Coll. Prof.
*Jacobus-H. Perry, Reip. Fsed.
1859.
Acad. Mil., S. T. D.
*1862.
J. A. Reubelt, A. M., Lingg. Recent.
Georgius-F. Brown, S. T. D.
Prof. Coll. La. et Ascib. Univ.
Thomas Carlton, S. T. D.
Gulielmus-H. Rule, S. T. D.
Gulielmus-G. Deale, M.D., A.M.
*Carolus-H. Zchiegner, A. M. *1860.
Ebenezer-E. Jenkins, A. M., Miss.
7
in Ind.
1856.
Johannes McClintock, Univ.
Spencerus-Fullerton Baird, 1840,
Penn, et A. M. et S. T. D. 1848,
D. P. S.
LL.D., Math, et Lingg. Antiq.
Jonathan-Townley Crane, Neo.
Prof., Univ. Troj. Prseses.
Cses. et A. M., S. T. D.
Otis-Henricus Tiffany, 1844,
Gulielmus-Balthrop Edwards,
S. T. D.
6
A. M. 1843, S. T. D. .
Edvardus-C. Seymour, A. M., in
1860.
Polytech. Nov. Ebor. Prof.
Elias Welty, A. M. .
5 David-W. Bartine, M.D., S.T.D.
Benjamin-Franklin Crever, A.M.
1857.
Gulielmus Dyson, LL. D.
Josephus Castle, A. M. Coll. Hamil. Henricus Slicer, S. T. D.
T.-R.Vickroy, A.B.
5
1835, S.T.D.
�CATALOGUS DICKINSONIENSIS.
1861.
Edvardus Bannister, Univ.Wes.
1838 et A. M., S. T. D., Univ.
Pacf. Praeses.
Edvardus Bates, LL. D. et Harv.
1858, e Cong. Faed. Repr., Reip.
Faed. Attorn. Prine.
* Gulielmus-H. Brisbane, A.M.
*1862.
Alexander-E. Gibson, A. M.
Georgius-S. Grape, A. M.
Georgius-F. McFarland, A. M.
45
Gulielmus Mann, S. T. D.
*1862.
Enoch-Hooven Supplee, A. M.
8
1862.
Gulielmus Cooper, S. T. D.
Jacobus-Hutchison Graham, 1827,
LL.D.
Thomas Sewell, S. T. D.
Gulielmus-Henricus Shock, A. M.
Benjamin Shoemaker, A. M.
5
�SUMM ARIUM.
Numerus integer................................................................................. 1157
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri .
.
.
.
.
.
.318
Supersunt adhuc................................................................ 839
Alumnorum numerus integer....................................................... 988
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri................................................................ 292
Supersunt adhuc
................................................................ 696
Legum Baccalaureorum numerus integer
....
35
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri.................................................................... 2
Supersunt adhuc.................................................................. 83
Alibi institutorum et honorariorum numerus integer
.
.
134
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri.................................................................. 24
Supersunt adhuc..........................................................110
Ecclesiarum pastorum numerus integer
....
317
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri.................................................................. 92
Supersunt adhuc................................................................ 225
Ecclesiarum pastorum alumnorum numerus integer
.
.
241
E vivis cesserunt stelligeri.................................................................. 80
Supersunt adhuc
.
.
.
•
•
.161
�INDEX
CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
a indicat Laureatos, qui alibi instituti fuerunt, vel apud nos gradu honorario donati.
I indicat Legum Baccalaureorum, qui singulis annis pro merito laureati
sunt.
Armstrong
Abbott
1823 Alfredus
1827 Ricardzes
1860 Henricus-W.
Adair
Arthur
1798 Jacobus
Bannister
a 1861 Edvardus
Ashbey
1798 Samuel
1823 Johannes-H.
1829 David
1829 Jolianves-R.
1845 Gulielmus-D.
Barber
a 1849 Robertus-S.
Aurand
1830 Henricus
Akers
Awl
1858 Josephus-B.
1835 Wesleius-J.
Aldred
Babb
1856 Gulielmus-R.
1840 Clemens-B.
1840 Edmundus-B.
Alexander
1798 Johannes-B.
1812 Samuel
1858 Robertus-N.
1849 Alfredus-A-BI,
1 1838 F-E.
1831 Johannes-M.
Z 1837 A.-Adams
1842 Alexander-B.
1852 Henricus-A.
Baird
1837
1839
1840
«1856
Annan
1824 Gulielmus
1824 Johannes-E.
Gulielmus-M.
Samuel
Spencer-F.
Spencer-F.
Baker
Argobast
1841 Carolus-J.
a 1852 Osmon-C.
1854 Benjamin
Baldridge
Archer
1790 Gulielmus
1861 Jacobus-G.
I
1857 Cornelius-F.
Barnitz
1855Gulielmus-T.
Barr
1805 Gulielmus
a I860 David- W.
Barton
Bailey
Anderson
1850 Flavel-C.
Barnes
Bartine
Baer
Ames
1808 Johannes-W.
1799 Samuel
1860 Benjamin-F.
a 1850 Gulielmus
Agnew
Armor
Ball
Baldwin
1856 Rignal-W.
a 1830 Edvardus-H.
1855 Jacobus-H.
1861 Jacobus
Bassett
1850 Jesse-G.
Bates
1839 Daniel-E.-M.
a 1861 Edvardus
Battee
1842 Johannes-S.
1842 Ricardus R.
Baughei’
1826 Henricus-L.
�48
INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
Blackford
Baylor
I860 Georgius
Beckley
1859 Daniel-A.
Beckwith
1859Jeremias-H.
Bedell
a 1830 Gregorius- T.
Beecham
a 1847 Johannes
Bell
1802 Samuel
1830 Jacobus
1831 Jacobus-W.
Belt
1812 Addison
Berry
a 1850
Best
Lucien-~W.
1858 Silas-B.
Bethune
1823 Georgius-W.
a 1843 Georgius-W.
Beverly
1812 Gulielmus-B.
1813 Jacobus-B.
Bibb
1851 Georgius-B.
Biddle
a 1831 Jacobus-O.
1839 Jacobus-D.
1848 Thomas-M.
Bierbower
1864 Augustinus
Birch
1829 Robertus
Birckhead
1813 Lennox
Bird
1840 Johannes-F.
1846 Gulielmus-F.
1857 Gustavus-C.
Bishop
1831 Gulielmus-S.
Black
a 1800
Robertus
1802 Jacobus-R.
1812 Thomas-T.
Blackinston
1814 Samuel-D.
Blackwell
1846Johannes-D.
Blaine
1814 Ephraimus-M.
Blair
1799 Armstrong
Bready
1829 Jacobus-H.
Breden
1795 Gualterus
1797 Gulielmus
Breitenbach
l 1840 Johannes
Brewerton
1787 Isaias
1845 Johannes-H.
Blythe
a 1847 Henricus
Bridges
1824Robertus
1812 Calvinus
Briggs
1829 Josephus
Boice
1823 Ira-Condit
Bonham
1 1840 J.-Ellis
Bosley
1844 Grafton-M.
Boswell
1844 Johannes-D.
1848 Gulielmus-L.
1858 Jacobus-J.
Bowdle
1854 Gulielmus-J.
Bowlus
1854 Noah
Bowman
1837 Thomas
1850 Jesse-S.
1855 Shadrach-Jj.
Boyce
1787 Johannes
Boyd
1788
1790
1799
1803
1808
1824
1846
Brandon
Johannes
Jacobus-P.
Alexander
Alexander
Gulielmus-A.
Samuel
Carolus-M.
Brackenridge
1792 Johannes
1809 Alexander
1828 Jacobus-G.
Brady
1798 Josephus
Brim
1857 Gulielmus- W.
Brisbane
a 1861 Gulielmus-H.
Broadwater
1858 Josephus-E.
Brooke
1815 Franciscus
1841 Benjamin-F.
1 1846 Johannes-P.
Brooking
1858 Johannes-C.
Brooks
1849 Chapman-V.
Brotherton
1790 Jacohus
Brown
1789
1794
1794
1812
1814
a 1816
1828
1846
1846
a 1859
1860
1864
Samuel
Gulielmus
Matthaus
Johannes
Jacobus
Samuel
Madison
Carolus-H.
Stephanus-T. Georgius-F.
Philippus-A.-B.
Sebastianus
Bruner
1841 David-E.
1860 David-B.
Bryan
1845 Ricardus-H.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
Bryson
Cannon
1787 Johannes
1795 Samuel
' 1828 'Robertus
Carcaud
Buchanan
Care
1798
1803
1805
1809
1826
a 1826
’ 1828
1829
al842
Andreas
Jacobus
Georgius
Jacobus
Georgius-W.
Johannes
Edvardus- Y.
Andreas-B.
Jacobus
Buckingham
1842 Perry-G.
Buckley
1842 Jonathan-E.
Buckner
1862 Johannes-H.
Bull
1798 Levi
1829 Thomas-K.
I 1840 Jacobus-H.
Burgess
a 1850 Gulielmus-P.
Burns
1857 Daniel-S.
Burnside
1828 Jacobus
Butler
<z 1808
1839
1841
<2 1858
Jacobus-R.
Gulielmus-H.
Georgius-G.
Gulielmus
Cahoone
1823 Gulielmus
Canfield
1864 Albertus-T.
Caldwell
1850 Jacobus-McH.
1858 Samuel-C.
Calhoun
1789 Jacobus
Callender
1792 Robertus
Campbell
1809
1825
1827
1828
Henricus-M.
Johannes-W.
Jacobus-M.
Gulielmus-H.
4
1860 Gulielmus-L.
1792 Gulielmus
1858 Thomas
Carlisle
1852 Jaeobus-T.
Carlton
a 1859 Thomas
Carothers
1814 Johannes
1829 Thomas-A.
Carr
1841 Gulielmus-B.
Carrigan
1847 Carolus-W.
Carson
1845 Johannes
1852 Theodorus-RL.
Carter
1 1836 Jacobus-H.
Cassat
1792 David
Castor
1814 Jesse-Y.
Cathcart
1826 Thomas-L.
Chamberlain
1814 Jeremias
1825 Johannes
Chambers
Clapham
1814 Josias
Clark
1805 Georgius
1805 Johannes
1838 Albertus-B.
1851 Johannes-P.
1856 Isaacus-D.
1856 Marvinus-E.
1863 Asburius-J.
Clawson
1853Johannes-E.
Clayton
1863 Gulielmus-D.
Cloud
1858 Daniel-M.
Cobean
1814 Thomas-B.
Cochran
1824 Gulielmus-P.
1847Wesleius
Cod wise
1823Alexander-B.
Coffey
1840Georgius-A.
Coffman
1862Wilmer
Collett
1811 Benjamin
Collins
<2 1841 Johannes-A.
a 1851 Carolus
1814 Gulielmus
<2 1858 Robertus-D.
Collinson
Chaney
Conn
1849 Ricardus-G.
1862 Thomas-M.
Chaplin
1843 Johannes-F.
Chattie
1852 Thomas
Chenowith
1850 Benjamin-D.
Cheston
1861 Henricus-C.
Cisna
1863 Gulielmus-R.
1850 Josephus-C.
1849 Gulielmus-D.
Conner
1852 Georgius-J.
Conrad
1857 Thomas-N.
Conway
1849 Moncure-D.
Cooke
1812 Colin
a 1841 Edvardus
Cookman
a 1858 Alfredus
49
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
50
Coombs
1848 Johannes-N.
Cooper
a 1792
1798
11840
a 1862
Robertus
Johannes
Jonathan-K.
Gulielmus
Corn man
1862 Gulielmus-O.
Cox
a 1858 Gulielmus
Coxe
1849 Johannes-R.
Craft
1813 Jacobus
Craig
1795 Abrahamus
Craighead
1826 Thomas
Crane
a 1846 Jonathan- T.
Crawford
1789 Jacobus
Creamer
I860 Georgius-B.
Creery
1842 Gulielmus-R.
Creigh
1788 Thomas
1792 Johannes
1828 Thomas
1830 Alfredus.
Creighton
1795 Gulielmus
Creswell
1848Johannes-A.-J.
Crever
a 1860 Benjamin-F.
Crook
1860 Jacobus-L.
Crooks
1840 Georgius-Ricardus
a 1857 Georgius-R.
Culbertson
1824 Jacobus
Cummins
1799 Carolus
1841 Georgius-D.
Cunningham
a 1789 --------
Curran
I860 Hugo-A.
1814 Gulielmus-H.
1827 Daniel
Devinney
1846 Jacobus-A.
Dickey
1824 Johannes-M.
Dickinson
1814 Festus
Curtin
1 1837 Andreas-G.
Cushman
a 1829 R------ W.
Dallam
1848Henricus-C.
Daniel
1848 Gulielmus
Darlington
a 1855 Gulielmus
Dashiel
Dickson
1856 Samuel-M.
Diehl
1851 Israel-S.
Dietrick
1852 Reuben-B.
Dill
1855 Andreas-H.
Dillinger
1 1839 Josephus-S.
a 1844 Johannes-H.
1846Robertus-L.
Dillon
Daugherty
Ditty
a 1855 Thomas
Davidson
1792
1795
1828
1829
Samuel
Patricus
Robertus
Jacobus-K.
Davie
1825 Johannes-T.-M.
Davis
1794 Henricus-L.
1829 Gulielmus-H.
1857 Georgius-W.-D.
Day
1851 Georgius-B.
1843 Isaacus
1857 C.-Irving
Docharty
a 1851 Gerardus-B.
Donald
1795 Samuel
Donaldson
a 1848 Alexander-C.
Donnell
1844 Henricus
Dow
1794 Alexander
Downes
1858 Philippus-W.
Deale
Downey
1848 Johannes-S.
1859 Gulielmus-E.-F.
a 1859 Gulielmus-G.
Duffield
Deems
Dugan
1839 Carolus-M.-F.
Denison
1838 Carolus
1840 Georgius-B.
1840 Henricus-M.
Denny
1788 David
1813 Harmar
1798' Gulielmus
1849 Georgius
1792 Georgius
Duke
1850 Jacobus
Dukes
1858Jacobus-K.
Dunbar
1824 Johannes R.-W.
«.
�51
INDEX CATALOGI DICSBSOXIEXSIS.
Duncan
1787 Roberins
3788 Jacobus
1800 Jesse
1805 Stephanus
1808 Saaoel-P.
a 1826 Thomas
11839 Jaeobus-AL
1845 Jacobus-W.
Dnnleavy
1812 Jacobus
Dyer
1859 Zebulon
Dysart
1845 Josephus
Dyson
a I860 Gulielmus
Earhart
1S5S Robertus-N.
Eccleston
1856 E.-Noel
Eckels
1855 Gulielmus-H.
Eckman
1860 Alerritt-D.
Edmonston
1851 Decius-W.
Edwards
1792 Haden
a 1843 G-tilielmus-B.
a 1856 G-ulielmus-B.
Effinger
1855 Johannes-R.
1857 Gulielmus-H.
Ege
1855 Thompson-P.
1859 Alexander-H.
Eichelberger
1826 Ludovicus
Elliott
1808 David
a 1857 Gulielmus
1864 Jacobus-S.
Emory
1841 Albertus-T.
1854 Samuel-G.
1837 Josephus-L.
I Engle
|
Gere
1827 Perrus-H.
Eshleman
1846 Durid-G.
1 Eyster
I
I
1861 Car^us-H.
Gerhard
1826 Gulielmus-W.
1338 Benjamin
j
'Gerry
1824
1861 Elbridge-H.
Field
1790 Frmtdscus
Dunlop
Gates
Engel
1351 Gulidma^-H.
1847 Gulielmus
* Getzendaner
I Finch
|
1858 Gulielmus-H.
Findlay
I
Gibbons
1845 Jaeobus-B.
1S57 Franeis-S.
i Finley
1811 Gulielmus
1813 Jacobus-B.
1845
Gibson
1
1854 Asher~D.
1S54 Otis
a1861 Alcjaander-E
Usher
ISOS Johannes
1S27 Sidneius-G.
1833 Georgius-P.
Floy
Gilbert
1862 Amos-P.
Gilchrist
1826 Adamus
a 1841 Jacobus
Follansbee
1844 Jacobus-M.
Forrest
1815 Julius
Forster
1829 Thomas
Gilder
<i 1845 GvliclmHs-H.
Gilleland
1792 Jacobus
1799 Jacobus
Gilmore
1S56 Johannes-C.
Gittings
Foster
1S09 Alfredus
Foulke
1792
1800
1829
1S45
I
I
Johannes
Georgius-D.
Ludovicus-W.
Georgius-W.
Fountain
1854 Nehemiah
Friese
1857 Valentinus
1858 Daniel-W.
Frisby
1831 Gulielmus-S.
Galbreath
1790 Josephus-S.
Garrison
1851 Georgius-T.
1787 Jacobus
Glover
1863 Georgius- N.
Godwin
1861 Gulielmus-F.
Goldsborough
1812 Gulielmus
Goodwin
a 1S5S Gitliclintis-ff.
Gordon
1811
1825
1845
185S
Carolus-P.
Pelatius-W.
Jacobus-B.
Marcus-L.
Gorgas
1854 Ferdinandus-J.-S.
Gorsuch
1844 Johannes-S.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
52
Gotwaltz
1850 Jacobus-V.
1855 Cyrus-F.
1850 Gulielmus-T.
1858 Henricus-D.
Grabill
I860 Johannes-H.
1860 Thomas-M.
Gustine
1798 Jacobus
1805 Ricardus
Guthrie
Gracy
1845 Johannes
Graham
Jacobies
Robertus
Thomas-J.
Jacobus-H.
Gulielmus-A.
Samuel-A.
Jacobus-H.
Johannes-C.
Grape
a 1861 Georgius-S.
1825
1825
1828
a 1852
Gulielmus-H.
Josephus-G.
Johannes-A.
Johannes-P.
Greason
1798 Jacobus-D.
Green
1811 Jacobus-S.
Greenbank
1848 Johannes
Gregg
1861 Henrieus-H.
Grier
1788
1797
1800
1803
1809
1809
1809
1809
1810
1812
Isaacus
Thomas
Isaacus
Johannes-F.
Johannes-C.
Johannes-H.
Johannes- W.
Robertus-S.
Johannes-E.
Robertus-C.
Griffith
1845
1855
1857
1858
1858
1798 Jacobus
"Gwin
1827 Alexander
Hagan
1813 Dennis
Halbert
1854 Gulielmus-D.
Hall
1846 Carolus
1847 Norman
Samuel-H.
Ludovicus-McK.
Edvinus-L.
Gulielmus-H.
Thomas-M.
Hamilton
1812
1839
1850
1864
Jacobus
Jacobus-G.
Alexander-McN.
Gulielmus
Hank
1846
1847
1848
1850
1863 Jacobus
Hassan
1795 Jacobus
Haverstick
1825 Henricus
1861 Levi
Hawkins
1814 Josias
Hayes
1805 Johannes
Hays
1794
1798
1812
a 1823
1857
David
Georgius
Alexander-L.
Adamus
Johannes
Heisley
Haller
1852 Gulielmus-L.
Gray
1840 Samuel-A.
1850 Jonathan-P.
Hart
Gunn
Gough
1797
1805
1812
1827
1844
1849
a 1862
1863
Gulden
Johannes-G.-F.
Johannes-N.
Jacobus-B.
Arminius-S.
Harding
1844 Ebenezer-D.
1848 Garrick-M.
Hare
1840 Samuel-D.
Harman
1848 Henricus-M.
Harmanson
1843 Johannes-L.
Harnsberger
1841 Henricus-B.
1856 Gulielmus-W.
Harper
1795 Gulielmus-A.
1847 Johannes-L.
Harrison
1811 Timotheus-J.
1816 Georgius.
1848 Johannes-W.
Hiester
1828 Augustus-O.
Helfenstein
1823 Gulielmus-L.
Hemphill
1792 Jacobus
Henderson
1790
1811
1825
1827
1 1840
1845
Ricardus
Johannes-A.
Matthceus-H.
Lorenzo-N.
Jonathan-K.
Robertus-M.
Hepburn
I 1836 Hiatt-P.
Herman
1862 Martinus.
Herron
1794 Franciscus
Hettick
a 1824 Paulus-J.
Heysinger
1854 Johannes-R.
Heydrick
I860 Carolus
Hickok
a 1849 Henricus
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
Hillman
1850 Samnel-D.
<z!852 Samuel-D.
Hillyard
1800 Johannes
Himes
1829 Carolus-F.
1855 Carolus-F.
Hinch
1827 Augustus-F.
Hiss
1850 Gulielmus-J.
Hobbs
1852 Ulysses
Hodgson
a 1839 Franciscus
Hoge
1789 David
Holden
1843 Warren
Holmes
1798 Thompson
1823 Jacobus
1829 Gulielmus-J.
Hood
1799 Thomas
1864 Johannes
Hopkins
1811 Georgius-R.
1827 Jacobus-M.
1858 Samuel-C.
Howard
a 1847 Gulielmus-M.
Hughes
1 1838 F.-W.
Huling
1815 David-W.
Hulsey
1858 Jennings-M.-C.
Humes
1829 Edvardus-C.
Hum rich
1852 Christianus-P.
Hunter
1792 Gulielmus
Hurst
1854 Johannes-F.
53
1859 Georgius-W.
Huston
1789 Carolus
1798 Robertus
1825 Samuel-R.
.
Johns
1794 Ricardus
Johnson
Hutchens
1849 Thomas-T.
Hutchinson
1802 Johannes
Ihrie
1815 Petrus-H.
1 1840 Jacobus-M.
a 1839 Reverdy
1857 Owen
Johnston
1826 Gulielmus-N.
Jones
Ing
1848 Gulielmus
Inglis
1829 Johannes-A.
1823Talbot
1857 Samuel-J.
Kaufman
1849 Johannes-K.
Inness
1839 Jaeobus-A.
Irvine
Keen
Georgius-B-
1794 Callender
1795 Jacobus
1830 Jacobus-R.
Irwin
1807 Gulielmus
Isett
1863 Henricus-F.
Ivins
a 1853 A.-B.
Jack
1794 Johannes
Keim
1 1846 Henricus-E.
1849 Georgius-De’B.
Keirle
1855 Nathaniel-G.
Keesee
1848 Carolus-G.
Kellar
1846 Jacobus-B.
Kelly
1816 Thomas
Jackson
a 1844 Thomas
1860 Clarentius-G. ’
Kemp
Jacob
Kennaday
1849 Johannes I.
a 1843 J.-L.
1846 Johannes-R.
Kennedy
Jacobs
1829 Cyrus-D.
1834 Thomas-B. '
Janes
1795 Johannes
1797 Robertus
1855 Josias-F.
a 1843 Edmundus-S.
a 1844 Edmundus-S.
Kennerly
Jarboe
Key worth
a 1853 Johannes-R.
1849 Caleb-B.-K.
1864 Henricus-Q.
Jenkins
Kidder
1828 Johannes-C.
a 1859 Ebenezer-E.
Kimberlin
Jester
a 1842 Luther
1851 Jacobus-M.
a 1856 Jacobus-E.-D.
John
1859 David-C.
4*
King
a 1792 Johannes
1858 Horatius-C.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
54
a 1827 David
1822 Thomas-R.
1824 Robertus-P.
a 1826 Ricardus-H.
1843 Washington
a 1853 Ricardus-H.
Knight
Leonard
Kingston
a 1842 Gulielmus
Kirkpatrick
1798 Josua
Knox
1794
1811
1824
1841
11841
1845
1855 Johannes-M.
Lesley
Robertus
Johannes
Jacobus
Georgius-W.
Gulielmus-B.
David
Krebs
1837 Edvardus-A.
1841 Jacobus
Levis
1847 Samuel
Lincoln
1841 Ricardus-Van’B.
1827 Johannes-M.
a 1841 Johannes-M.
Lind
Kurtz
Lindsly
a 1823 Philippus
Linn
1825 Gulielmus-H.
Labagh
1823 Abrahamus-J.
1823 Isaacus-P.
Laird
1792 Jacobus
1794 Frhnciscus
1794 Gulielmus.
Lamberton
1843 Robertus-A.
11843 Gulielmus-H.
Landis
1860 Johannes-W.
Latta
1829 Jacobus-F.
Laverty
1809 Robertus
Lawson
1 1840 Gulielmus-C.
Leake
1792 Josias
1794 Austin
Leakin
1850 Phil-M.
Learning
1812 Jeremias-F.
Leas
1858 Johannes-H.
Leclerc
1838 Edvardus-E.
Lee
1812 Ricardus-H.
1802 Johannes
1805 Jacobus
Linton
1814 Johannes-J.
Lippincott
1858 Benjamin-C.
1858 Joshua-A.
Lloyd
1847 DeWitt-C.
Long
1863 Thomas-B.
Loomis
1862 Jacobus-H.
Loop
1844 Diego-J.-M.
Lore
1852 Carolus-B.
Lovejoy
1844 Perley-R.
Lowe
1851 Georgius-H.
Lowry
1829 Edvardus-J.
Lupton
1849 Nathaniel-T.-G.
1859 Samuel-L.
Lynch
1852 Jethro-G.
Lyon
1792 Johannes
1795 Johannes
1825 Georgius-A.
1839 Gulielmus
1839 Johannes
1852 Thomas-L.
Macartney
1848 Franciscus
Macbeth
1825 Alexander
Maclay
1825 Samuel
1845 Robertus-S.
1850 Gulielmus-J.
Macomb
1797Thomas
Magaw
1806 Jesse
Maglaughlin
1858 Carolus-E.
Magraw
1827 Samuel-M.
Mahon
1789
1805
1814
1815
1827
Samuel
Alexander
Johannes-D.
David-N.
Josephus
Malcolm
a 1842 Howard
Makeley
1863 Leander
Mann
a 1861 Gulielmus
Markle
1850 Johannes-G.
Marlatt
1850 Archibaldus-G.
Marriott
1858 Henricus
Marshall
1848 Jacobus G.
1856 Jacobus-P.
Marsteller' •
1812 Samuel-A.
Martin
a 1789
1815
1844
1858
--------Georgius-T.
Josephus-H.
Johannes-H.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
McConkey
Mason
1822 Jacobus-Hall
1823 Erskine
Massey
1841 Benjamin-M.
McCord
1844 Isaias-W.
1837 Josua-Albertus
McCorkle
1838 Benjamin-Addison a 1792 Samuel
1841 Thomas-E.
Maxwell
1861 Gulielmus-H.
Maybin
1813 Josephus-A.
a 1828 Josephus-A.
Mayer
1812 Carolus-F.
McAllister
1 1835 J.-N.
1840 Ricardus-Beale
McCabe
1844 Georgius-H.
Me C ah an
1861 Johannes-E.
McCalmont
1844 Alfredus-B.
McCants
1861 Thomas-J.
McCarty
1852 Johannes
McCeney
1852 Theophilus
McCauley
1847 Jacobtcs-A.
McClanahan
1788 Jacobus
McClean
1788 Jacobus
McClelland
1795 Thomas
a 1830 Alexander
McClintock
a 1859 Johannes
McClure
1802
1824
1827
1845
Johannes
Carolus
Gulielmus-B.
Johannes
McConaughy
1792 David
McCormick
a 1792 Jacobus
a 1810 Jacobus
1812 Jacobus
McCoskry
1815 Carolus-N.
1824 Samuel-A.
McCulloch
1825 Johannes-W.
1829 Samuel
McCurdy
1862 Daniel-W.
McCurley
1862 Isaacus
McDowel
1792 Maxwell
1863 Gulielmus-L.
McEnally
1845 Josephus-B.
McFarland
a 1861 Georgius-F.
55
1824 Isaacus
1825 Gulielmus-D.
McIntyre
1847 Carolus-J.-T.
1863 Ben-P.
McJimsey
1792 Johannes
McKeehan
'
1787 David
McKesson
1792 Johannes
McKim
1828 Jacobus-M.
1830 Johannes-L.
McKinley
1823 Daniel
McKenney
1814 Mordekias
1829 Johannes-C.
McKnight
1792 Jacobus
McLanahan
1827 Jacobus-X.
McLelland
1829 Robertus
McLeod
McFarlane
a 1831 Alexander
a 1834 I.-N.
1813 Gulielmus
a 1829 Alexander
McMurtrie
McGavock
1794 Randolph
McGill
1794 Jacobus
McGilvray
1851 Gulielmus-B.
McGinley
1798 Amos-A.
McGinnis
1831 Armstrong
McGraw
a 1826 Jacobus
McGuire
1 1837 Robertus-A.
McNeil ey
1813 Jacobus-G.
McPherrin
1788 Johannes
McPherson
1812
1829
1843
1858
Gulielmus-S.
Gulielmus-S.
Robertus
Samuel-M.
Meade
1829 Philippus-N.
Medairy
1849 Johannes-G.
a 1848 Hugh-H.
a 1848 Henricus-G.
Melson
Mcllvaine
Mercer
1809 Gulielmus
1853 Jonathan-J.
1813 Gulielmus-D.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
56
Merrick
1859 Gulielmus-W.
Milby
1839 Arthurus-W.
Milbourne
1855 Sewell-T.
Miller
1808 Jacobus-H.
1842 Archer-G.
Mitchell
1798 Gulielmus
Monteith
1798 Alexander
Montgomery
1797 Moses
1824 Samuel
Moore
1792 Johannes
1795 Andreas
1838 Thomas-V.
1841 Carson-C.
a 1853 Thomas- V.
More
1789 Jacobus
Morgan
a 1849 Josephus-A.
a 1845 Ricardus
a 1858 Littleton-F.
Morris
1823 Johannes- G.
1842 Robertus-F.
Motter
1862 Georgius-T.
Muhlenberg
1829 Hiester-H.
1840 Henricus-A.
Mullin
1858 Alfredus F.
Munroe
1855 Johannes-A.
1861 Henrieus-S.
Musselman
1851 Amos-F.
Myers
1 1838 Johannes-J.
1851 Philippus
Nabb
1815 Georgius-W.
Nadal
1848 Bernardus-H.
a 1857 Bernardus-H.
Neal
a 1802 Jacobus-A.
Neff
1861 Carolus-W.
Neide
1828 Josephus-C.
Neill
1827 Gulielmus-W.
Nelson
1829 Gulielmus-F.
Neville
a 1847 Edvardus
Nevin
1795 Johannes
1827 Gulielmus-M.
1 1837 Alfredus
Newton
Palmer
1829 Jacobus-C.
Parke
1809 Samuel
Parker
1824 Andreas
1837 Gulielmus-B.
1 1839 Johannes-B.
1844 Thomas-B.
1859 Isaacus-B.
1859 Thomas-S.
1860 Josephus-B.
Parrott
1849 Marcus-J.
Parsons
1856 Gulielmus M.
Passmore
1795 Johannes
Patten
1794 Gulielmus
a 1842 Robertus
Patterson
Nisbet
1802
1824
1829
1859
a 1855
1794 Alexander
Noland
1794 Gulielmus
1809 Lloyd
Norris
1824 Gulielmus
Nourse
1824 Jacobus
Nyce
1829 Benjamin-M.
Ogden
1813 Isaacus-A.
Ogilby
1862 Gulielmus-M.
O’Neil
1803 Johannes
O’Neill
1840 Carolus
Orbison
1 1835 Gulielmus-P.
Owens
1830 Johannes
Page
1816 Johannes-E.
Gulielmus
Matthceus-B.
Johannes-B.
Jacobus-J.
Stearns
Pattison
1842 Johannes-R.
1843 Robertus-H.
Patton
1812 Robertus
1828 Benjamin
Paxton
a 1826 Gulielm/us
Peach
1852 Sa.muel-H.
1854 Johannes
Peachey
1790 Thomas-G.
Peacock
1841 Bannister-G.
Peale
1850 Samuel-R.
Peck
1852 Jonathan-K.
Pennewill
1851 Caleb-S.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
■ Penrose
1844 Gulielmus-M.
1846 Ricardus-A.-F.
Penuel
1859 Clayton-C.
Perrie
1854 Josephus-B.
1857 Gulielmus-F.
Perry
a 1855 Jacobus-H.
Pfeiffer
1854 Henrieus-H.
Phelps
1846 Johannes-A.
Phillips
1840 Johannes
Pierce
1810 Paulus-S.
1852 Ralph
Piper
1815 Alder
Pitcher
1863 Edvinus-F.
Pittman
1838 Carolus-W.
Points
1864 Moses-A.
Pollock
1828 Samuel
Postleth waite
1792 Jacobus
Potter
1812 Georgius-L.
Potts
1843 Jonas-J.
Poulson
1826 Robertus-I.
Powel
1814 Humphredus-B.
1844 Samuel-I.
Preston
1799 Johannes
Prettyman
1848 Elijah-B.
Price
1827 Johannes-H.
a 1830 Gulielmus-H.
Rheem
Pringle
1806 David
1808 Franciscus
1808 Jacobus
Procter
1839 Johannes-O.
Proudfit
1798 Robertus
Pue
1859 Jacobus-A.-V.
Pursel
1857 Benjamin-F.
Purviance
1790 Johannes
Purvis
1853 Gulielmus-C.
Rh einhart
1855 Georgius-P.
Rhodes
1838 Josephus-C.
Rickets
1853 Agib
Riddle
1812 Jacobus-D.
Rider
1842 T.-W.-P.
1850 Granville-R.
Ridgaway
1849 Henriczts-B.
1856 Jacobus-F.
Putnam
1797 Edvinus
Rainey
1798 Gulielmus
Ralston
1813 Robertus
Ramsey
1810 Samuel-D.
1824 Mattheeus-V.-L.
1 1840 Alexander
Randolph
1814 Ricardus-R.
Rawlings
1848 Samuel-A.
Read
1811 Thomas-M.
Reed
Ridgely
1797 Henricus-M.
Ritchie
1828 Edvardus
1853 Albertus
Robinson
1847 Johannes-M.
Roe
1839 Gulielmus-F.
Rohrer
1851 Martin-T.
1853 David-F.
Ross
1792 Carolus
1828 Baker-J.
Rounds
a 1854 Nelson
Rule
a 1855 Gulielmus-H..
a 1830 Johannes
1841 Johannes-H.
1851 Gulielmus-C.-F.
Rusling
Reese
Russell
1858 Thomas-S.
Reid
1806 Andreas-K.
Salkeld
1795 Georgius
Reubelt
a 1855 J.-A.
Reynolds
1792
1825
11840
1850
1854 Jacobus-F.
Samuel
Johannes-C.
Hugo-W.
Samuel-H.
a 1847 Joseph
Sanders
1860 Jacobus-W.
Sanderson
1789 Alexander
Sassaman
1855 Augustus-S.
57
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
58
Speake
Sims
Sawyer
1840 Johannes-M. ’
1846 Alfredus-G.
1853 Augustus-M.
Schoonmaker
Sinclair
a 1831 Jacobus
1788 Matthaus
Scott
Slape
Scouler
Slavens
1858 Albertus-H.
1859 Duke
Sellers
1861 Franciscus-B.
Sellman
1850 Ricardus-D.
Semple
1787 Steel
'
Sergeant
a 1826 Johannes
Sewell
1848 Jacobus-G.
a 1862 Thomas
Seymour
1853 Edmundus-B.
a 1856 Edvardus-C.
Shapley
I860 Rufus-E.
Sharon
1803 Jacobus
Sharp
Slaymaker
1808 Jasper
1829Jacobus-A.
1838Amos
a 1860 Henricus
Robertus
Austin
Jacobus
Johannes
Thomas-B.
Jacobus
Digby-D.-B.
Samuel
Abrahamus-H.
Henricus-G.
Gulielmus-S.
Smithers
1 1840 Nathan-B.
Smyser
Sharretts
Snively
Shearer
1853 Jacobus-M.
Sherlock
1852 Thomas
Shipley
1860 J.-Lester
Shippen
1790 Johannes
1808 Henricus
Shock
a 1862 Gulielmus-H.
Shoemaker
a 1862 Benjamin
Shreve
I860 Ricardus-S.
1827 Matthseus
Spcering
1814Carolus-F.
S,phon
1824 Paris
1841Wilson-L.
Sprigg
Smith
1815 Gulielmus-M.
1 1840 Thomas-C.
1825 Nicholas-G.
Spencer
Spottswood
Slicer
1790
1792
1792
1806
1810
1816
1823
1824
1840
1849
1864
1 1842 Carroll
Speer
1788 Gulielmus
1789 Jacobus
a 1806 Thomas
1839 Jacobus-B.
1863 Henricus-C.
Spence
1827 Daniel-M.
1852 Gulielmus-A.
1857 Josephus-C.
Snow
1843 Josias
1848 Benjamin
1795 Gulielmus
Stamm
1860 Johannes-®.
Stayman
1841 Johannes-K.
Steel
1792 Andreas
1792 Gulielmus
1792 Johannes
Sterret
1795 Gulielmus
Sterritt
1827 Alexander-M.
Stevens
1845 Johannes-H.
Stevenson
1800 Georgius
1858 Gulielmus- T.
Stewart
a 1790 Nathaniel-R.
1805 Georgius
1 1840 Gulielmus-M.
1841 Gulielmus-H.
Snyder
Stinson
Snowden
1814 Jacobus
1861 Carolus-R.
Somerville
1813 Jacobus
Sparrow
1850 Ludovicus
Spayd
1829 Johannes-C.
1845 Carolus-H.
Stockton
1798 Thomas
Stone
1854 Alfredus-C.
1859 David-D.
Storm
1861 Johannes-B.
�INDEX CATALOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
Townsend
Stout
1841 Edvardus
Stuart
1795 Gulielmus
1816 Gulielmus
Sudler
a 1840 Thomas-Emory
Supplee
a 1861 Enoch-H.
Sweeny
1815 Georgius
Sweet
1837 Joshua
Sykes
1812 Jacobus
Taney
1795 Rogerus-Brooke
Taylor
1812 Jesse
1825 Robertus-E.
a 1831 Rogerus-Brooke
Temple
1840 Jacobus-Norton
Thomas
1815
1849
1848
1851
Gulielmus
Jacobus-H.
Thomas
Jacobus-S.
Thompson
1790 Johannes
1797 Jacobus
1828 Gulielmus-J.
1838 Jacobus-McF.
1850. Dugald
Tiffany
1844 Otis-H.
1850 Carolus-C.
a 1859 Otis-H.
Tilghman
1841 Carolus-H.
Tingle
1814 Gulielmus
Tizzard
1841 Augustus-B.
Todd
1792 Johannes
1839 Lemuel
Torbert
1855 Henricus-R.
1856 Adamus-E.
Toy
1839 Gulielmus
Travers
1812 Georgius
Tucker
1855 Johannes-S.
Troxel
1856- Jacobus-W.
Tudor
1850 GulielmusVan B.
Tyler
1814 Johannes-F.
Urn er
1845 Isaac-N.
Van Arsdale
a 1845 A.-C.
Van-Bibber
1829 Isaacus
Van-Cleef
1823 Cornelius
Vanhorn
1828 Jacobus
Vansant
1850 Simpson-T.
V eazey
1811 Thomas-B.
1839 Georgius-Ross
Vethake
a 1827 Johannes-W.
Vickroy
59
Walston
1856 Gulielmus-B.
Walton
1847 Moses
1854 David-H.
Warfield
1859 Josua D.
Waters
1838 Gulielmus-S.
1849 Johannes-H.
1856 Jacobus-D.
Watson
a 1814 Gulielmus
Watts
1787 David
1824 Henricus-M.
Waugh
|
1798 Johannes
1845 Beverly-R.
Wayne
1792 Isaacus
Woesche
1849 Georgius-W.
Webster
1847 Edvinus-H.
Weech
1858 Gulielmus-T.-L.
Weems
1855 Henricus-Y.
Weir
1862 Alfredus-N.
Weller
1852 Johannes
Welty
a 1860 T.-R.
a 1856 Elias
Waddell
West
j?1792 Jacobus
Wade
1855 Jacobus-D.
Wakeman
Z 1841 Edgar-B.
Walker
1787 Jonathan
1814 Stephanus-Duncan
Wallace
1840 Jacobus
1827 Franciscus
Wharton
1794 Austin
1794 Jesse
Whisner
I860 Petrus-H.
White
1802
1828
1841
1854
1858
Crawford
Natlian-G.
Gulielmus-B.
Marcus
Johannes-J.
�- (
INDEX CA^LOGI DICKINSONIENSIS.
^.60
Wilson
Whitehead
1823 'Carolus
Whitehill
1792 Robertas
1825 Georgius-S.
Whitney
1843.Gulielmus-L.
Wicks a 1844 Gulielmus
Wing
Wilcox
1857
Andreas-J.
Wiley
a 1858 Isaacus-W.
Wilkins
1816 Ross
1842 Carolus-P.
Willey
1862 Gulielmus-P.
Williams
1795
1795
1823
1825
.'
Josias
JoSua
Gulielmus-H.
Thomas
Williamson
1799
1808
1809
1824
Stewart
Johannes
Gulielmus y ‘
Moses
Willis
1815 David
1790 Robertus-G.
1792 Johannes
1798 Henricus-R.
1848 Johannes
1848 Henricus-M.
1850Gulielmus-C.
1852 Josephus-B.
1855Archibaldus-G.
1855 Thomas
1798
1838
1839
1842
I 1842
1848
1858
1859
Johannes
Johannes-A.
Thomas
Benjamin J?.
Thomas
Archibald-W. '
Josephus-P.
Johannes-W.
Wylie
a 1816 Samuel-Brown
a 1857 Conway-R.
1864 Theodorus-T.
Wingard
1847 Samuel C.
Winner
1848 Johannes-O.
Woods
1792
1802
1814
1859
Wright
Gulielmus
Samuel
Jacobus
David-S.
Woodward
1838 Gulielmus-R.
1843 Leonidas
Wootton
1813 Ricardus
Work
1795 Edvardus
Worthington
1812 Gulielmus-M.
Yocum
1860 Seth-Y.
Young
1788
1813
1823
1843
1848
Johannes
Gulielmus
Johannes-C.
Gulielmus-S.
Carolus-B.
Zcheigner
a 1855 Carolus-H.
Zeigler
1864 Josephus-B.
Zell
1809 Jacob
Zimmerman
1859 Georgius-H.
1861 Gulielmus-H.
zug
1837
Johannes
I 1840 Johannes
a
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Catalogus senatus academici, et eorum qui munera et officia academica gesserunt, quique alicujus gradus laurea donatic sunt, in Collegio Dickinsoniensi, carleoli in republica Pennsylvaniensi
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Philadelphia
Collation: 60 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date in Roman numerals.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5617
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Dickinson College
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Catalogus senatus academici, et eorum qui munera et officia academica gesserunt, quique alicujus gradus laurea donatic sunt, in Collegio Dickinsoniensi, carleoli in republica Pennsylvaniensi), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
Latin
Conway Tracts
Dickinson College
Education
Universities
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/493cd2fd747fae6d0ab7e3041be59340.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=i%7EmI0pFTW4oXAl8YidS8jc85pnr%7E8SP34eGU0FOEeCFMevyjwvPWDFEJSkgPkcsv0CXWaqJJ5312MPJY4lNlPWTKbnRco0CzemCf4tJ8E2JqALc0%7ENYdclzNUStljmizr8VFpuocPGoVGjk5QM4yp-tiLqjHSAgVfRFBJH5YL15LH6pCYHOw%7E3TT5X18qNqok06BVoE8Yw6fu8DNJuEOhFoEJ-rAYBFK%7ERKVkqfycO54jTXHVF5plT1-s2O4K-4cKZQ-LclZHsl6zTAcQryvgn8NYGu%7ENcSrXgOPUheF4lSu5BnL56uYCByoZ8fRTOygci-cq5UamJ85mbtf3FDttw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b84329ee442258d2215a4cffb3a79735
PDF Text
Text
Ji_ -
'■ X*;
■ft
Ar * ’
J
■ '^'4
~*>Wilrf>>
■!
i’’''
Mt
"Finsbury Chapel, South Place,
t”.
February 17, 1864.
» *v
4
My
' z
&.
M
.Ju
■?-
,x.'
F **j
.
**The Committee of South-Place Chapel beg respect-
fully to inform you that Mr. M. D. Conway, of Boston,
United States, has undertaken to conduct the Morning
Services for/ihe next six months continuously, and they
invite your Renewed cooperation with them in maintain-
A.
ing these Services.
South-Place Chapel having been ori
ginally constituted as a place where the freest Religious
Thought then* reached might have unrestrained utterance,
a majority of the members have, from time to time, suc
cessfully combated every attempt to reduce them to a
merb sect; and the Committee cannot doubt but that
their success hitherto is a guarantee for their future suc
cess, especially at the present moment, when the test of
unshrinking | criticism is applied to every dogma and
every doctrine, however venerable, and when only what
is True has |ny chance of permanent endurance*.
ours truly,
4
$
J . ,
1**% M. E? MARSDEN,
f
Ti
rer.
Treasur
4*
a! '4
7
** W
y
** , <
WU
/?
����
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Letter giving notice of M.D. Conway's agreement to conduct South Place Chapel Morning Services]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Marsden, Mark Eagles
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: I folded leaf.
Notes: A notice of M.D. Conway's appointment signed M.E. Marsden, Treasurer, on behalf of the Committee of South Place Chapel dated February 17 1864. The blank side is a handwritten passage by Conway which is the beginning of his first sermon on his predecessor, W.J. Fox. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
South Place Chapel
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5576
Subject
The topic of the resource
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work ([Letter giving notice of M.D. Conway's agreement to conduct South Place Chapel Morning Services]), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Moncure Conway
Sermons
South Place Chapel
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/fce935b68e07f1aabf19773c99a45f0f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=VfSDR9ptfBVVMQgU5k-xTfQ-dPu919tjPfXzkOAQJhEUCX%7Ea-oBikxIrdTgDPabAkoAjMHbDy2xYy%7E%7Exrm%7Ed01lbQSA82bFMRkXOB7LKLiWi2gCXwuxWs1JU2QWjWjYDLqBsbTQ6lpgq8ZMa8xK-BEaZUOD1yccY0OtV-gcrJckPI%7E9aE6rmBahNvDwho7je3AfDSCKoTX6IzrfT4dH6ICvdDPQ%7E5I3qxi07pdOWfFgWbzV-MCxFE4cqOT2Gq0fXPJEpRbqdT-Yk%7EUwTGM18SjeEg9iiMQVAOAeygSC6CGWSEpmSZhJf%7EgUgwJfmnosw-m4y2bhiuH1TZkl6tfb-Og__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e79b754c401ffb1ab1f8e765c337b563
PDF Text
Text
ON THE CURE, ARREST, AND ISOLATION
OF
SMALL
POX.
�“Above all Theory in the Art of Warfare, one practical
fact reigns triumphant—‘Defeat the enemy ’—a truth that
will always triumph over all theories.”—Garibaldi.
�TO THOMAS L. HARRIS,
Now OE Wassaic,
THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE IN ALL AFFECTION
INSCRIBED,
IN THE HOPE THAT HE MAY FIND THEM WORTHY
OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE,
AND AS A TRIBUTE AND A TESTIMONY
OF
A FREE
BROTHERHOOD
IN HEART AND SPIRIT.
�CONTENTS
Preface..................................................................................... .......
I. Small Pox...................................................................... 1
II. Erysipelas..................................................................... 14
III. Inflammation of the Spine, with Rheumatism . 20
IV. Inflammation of the Womb following Pregnancy 21
V. Chronic Inflammation of the Right Ovary .
. 22
VI. Earache with Impending Meningitis
.
.
.25
VII. Inflammation of the Parotid G-land .
.
.28
VIII. Acute Tonsillitis............................................................ 28
IX. Hcemorrhoids following Confinement
.
. 29
X. Inflammation about the Cjecum .
.
.
.31
XI. Enlarged and Irritable Breasts .
.
.
.33
XII. Chronic Abscesses ....... 34
XIII. Bunions.............................................................................. 34
XIV. Case of Threatened Mesenteric Disease Ar
rested ..................................................................... 35
XV. Cases of External Injury.......................................... 40
XVI. Ditto............................................................................. 41
XVII. Shingles Treated by Cantharides Lotions .
. 42
XVIII. Cellulitis..................................................................... 43
XIX. General and Local Cellulitis
.
.
.
.50
XX. Eruptive Fever........................................................... 62
Medical Freedom..........................................................67
Appendix.............................................................................. 87
�PREFACE.
Talking one day with a friend I made the remark, that I
never ceased to wonder that the enormous cost involved
in the railways, is justified by the public convenience,
and requited by the public money; and that I could
not but draw from this an inference that every good
thing, however onerous, is worth while doing. “ Ah!” he
said, “that reminds me of a woodcut in one of Bewick’s
books, in which a husbandman is ploughing the field,
and underneath him is written—‘ Justissima Tellus.1 ”
For nature is so munificently constructed as to yield back
in crops whatever seed of good we put into her; to repay
with living inheritances of power whatever trouble we
bestow upon her; to bank for us with compound in
terest of her own intentions; to enhance all faculty and
all freedom; to be diligent to the diligent, niggard to
the niggard, loyal to the loyal; to be in the long-run
supreme poetical justice; and in short to grow forth our
natural wants and wishes, world-sized, into entire ac
complishments.
Medical nature is a part of this mighty motherhood,—
this predestined conception of our human wants; this
bearing of them in the womb of time, and bringing them
forth in forms which partake of the creative current
which flows through both the parents, that is, through
man and the world, from the throne of The Supreme.
But only according to the seed of want, and according
to the husbandry, is the yield which Justissima TeUus,
�viii
PREFACE.
our most account-keeping, stock-taking, and income-ap
portioning ground, bestows upon us.
If we ask little
and insist little, nature, which loves our littleness because
it is our freedom, is charged to maintain us uninfringed,
by giving us little.
And now to come lower down,
medicine has asked but little of nature; and has only
got what she asked.
I have written the following pages to embolden us to
ask for more; because more can be had, on just, if not
on easy terms.
The treatment of diseases has too much ended itself
in the prescription pure and simple; and the prescription
has too much confined itself to something to be put into
our primce vice,—our mouths. It is the most obvious
way, and the least trouble. But it has led to a waiting
upon disease, in place of grappling with it. Nay, as
Prescription is not always obeyed by Disease, it has led
to the Nightingale theory that disease is a reparative
process, and destruction, of course on the great scale,
very complete repair; and this led in earlier times to
treating disease, as a conqueror can hardly fail to be
treated, with royal honours; welcoming it with open
gates, strewing flowers of compliments before its path,
coaching it softly in express medical carriages, welcoming
it home in the palaces of health ; and making its bed,
for rest and for begetting, of the softest down of medi
cal acquiescence.
This was exemplified in the treatment of small-pox;
in which even so late a writer, and so really great a
physician as Elliotson, declares that there is very little
to be done, except upon general principles; the bed
where the monster is preying upon the man being care
fully watched, and only the monster’s rudenesses patted
into rhyme with physicianal propriety.
Thus our Elliotson says : “ There is nothing peculiar
*
* Principles and Practice of Medicine, 1839, pp. 412-3.
�IX
PREFACE.
in the treatment of this disease. It is only the treat
ment of an ordinary fever. . . . Any inflammation
that may occur . . . requires to be attended to.
You must constantly be on the look out for these affec
tions ; but the treatment is certainly to be conducted
altogether on general principles. You have only to
remember that you are treating, not merely an inflam
matory, but a specific disease.”
It would have seemed that though the inflammatory
complication wanted general principles, the specific
disorder required specific remedies. However, in thus
extracting from Dr. Elliotson, let it be known that I
impugn a system, and not that eminent man, to whose
skilful general treatment indeed, under Providence, I
owe my life; and the wedge of whose persistent courage
and powerful natural faculty has opened the medical
age to a part of the new and true good things which it
now possesses.
But the old treatment of small-pox was more defer
ential to the good disease than even the treatment on
“general principles.” The late Mr. Carpue narrated to
me a case which illustrates this. A small-pox patient
grievously held, was imnvmed with his disease in the
deepest oubliette of bed, and blanket, and coverlet; and
curtained all round and all over in his four-poster;
and every door shut, and every window draped; and
every cry for air and water deafly disregarded; and the
mantle of all his stenche® wrapped round and round
him until he was the mummy of his own decays; and
as might be expected, he died. Then the effluvia were
so horrible that overnight he was laid in a summer-house
at the bottom of the garden, and when they went with
disgusted caution and curiosity to him next morning, he
had, by virtue of fresh air and general principles, come
to life again; and he ultimately recovered.
This, perhaps, may have been one of the last cases in
A
�X
PREFACE.
which the royal entertainment of small-pox, and the
petting and pampering of it, were practiced; and in
which Justissima Tellus was regarded as the proper
terminus of the triumphal procession of the disease
through the streets of the man, with the colleges of
physicians and surgeons swelling its train.
Since then, air and cleanliness, and water and diet
have shorn the small-pox of the richness of its de
structions, and some general principles of treatment, in
contradistinction to pampering, have had fair play.
But still the same system has been maintained, though
more cleanly, more respectably, and most scientifically.
It has been maintained under the belief or general prin
ciple that small-pox has a certain course to run, and
must not be checked in its career. The aim, therefore,
has been, in the orthodox body, to limit its excesses, as
Dr. Elliotson proposes; and among the Homoeopaths,
to find specifics for its whole career. My aim is, to dis
allow its career, and knock it on the head as soon as
possible. For I am acquainted with the results of both
practices; and I dislike those results. In Homoeopathy
I have seen cases which have been most carefully, and
if you like beautifully treated, on the theoretical grounds
of the allowance of the entire disease; also in which
diet has been limited, also on theoretical, and I believe
false, grounds; and the patients have been permanently
weakened by the disease and the dietetic system: and I
know that hi those cases the treatment has been ineffi
cient, and the specific remedies not grappling with the
vast bulk of the disease, have been at the best but so much
internal hygeine.
And therefore I also know that the
efficiently specific treatment of small-pox is still a desi
deratum, and that success in arresting the disease is the
only specificity worth having.
I dare to hope that I have attained to a part of that
success. This has been by local remedies; the Veratrwm
�PREFACE.
xi
Viride as general local treatment; the Hydrastis Cana
densis as specific local treatment.
The same remedies
internally as specific internal treatment. This local
treatment, not only for this but for almost all other
diseases, is the new labour and trouble which I believe
will be repaid with new health by Justissimum Corpus,
which, in its faculty of grateful return for work done and
trouble taken, is the very blossom and glory of Justissima
Tellus. The fairy wishing-cap of infinitesimal dynamic
doses does indeed set the eyes wistfully towards the dis
tant plains of health; but it requires hard Roman work,
and railway generations and ages, of local digging and
delving, to carry, not the eyes but the material body
itself, where the wishes can go in a moment. The road
for this, like all other roads, must be born into the world
with pains.
- The success of local treatment at present to be regis
tered is:—
I. The disease has been abridged in duration.
II. The inflammation and primary fever accom
panying it are certainly and speedily
abolished.
III. The secondary fever is annulled.
IV. The itching of the pustules is annulled, and
the patient has no motive to pick the face.
V. The stench of the old disease has no place.
VI. The suffering is reduced to a minimum.
VII. Owing to the perfect antiphlogistic action,
nourishment and stimulants can be borne
almost from the first.
VIII. There is no pitting, and, a fortiori, iio seam
ing ; only, of course, the complexion is
altered for a time.
IX. Any private person, male or female, medical
or lay, with care and courage, can treat
the disease successfully, owing to the sim-
�PREFACE.
plicity of the means: an invaluable result
where professional services are not at
hand. And multitudes of patients, for the
. ' . . . same reason, can easily be treated at
once.
The probable hope and scope of local treatment
embraces other heads still.
I.
The arrest of the disease at the outset, by early
recognising and promptness of application.
II. The extinction of the infection, by the entire
mass of the disease, its pieces, dust, and
effluvia becoming coated with and neutra
lised by the Hydrastis ; which appears,
therefore, to isolate the malady from the
very attendants, and hermetically to seal it.
.
Ill- Immunity for the healthy from the disease,
by the prophylactic powers of the Hydrastis
taken internally, and by sponging baths, with
a teaspoonful of Hydrastis Tincture in them,
night and morning, for infected families and
attendants on the sick.
These means can be easily employed by whole neigh
bourhoods. At Guildford, a few days ago,-1 saw the
Surrey militia encamped in the fields, and was told that
this was on account of the small pox, which was raging
in the town. What a valuable thing it ■will be to possess
a remedy which guards new comers against the existing
infection, and which taken in the spring of the year, when
they say the small-pox has a tendency to come from its
lair m that locality, also preserves the population, and
thus ultimately extinguishes the beds of the disease.
These, results and these hopes ought to commend my
method for instant trial to Boards of Guardians in neigh
bourhoods such as Birmingham, where the whole town is
in alarm on account of - the small-pox; where infection
spreads by the very act of massing the sick in hospitals;
�xiii
and where the parochial rates will be greatly increased
by the public expenses of the disease.
So much at present for small-pox. Am I not justified
in saying that the trouble taken in the local application
of the specific which I have discovered, to the entire sur
face and mass of the disease, is repaid, as no less positive,
material, persistent remedies 'have ever before been '
repaid, by alleviation, abridgement, and cure? For this
method, mark you, of local application of drugs to the
very part which is ailing, or else to the very skin of the
organ and part, is more positive and material than any of
the orthodox conceptions of general treatment, and yet
perfectly harmless; and unlike the case of gross medicines
given by the mouth, expends the greater part of its force
not upon the system, but upon the locality, and, we may
say, the essence of the disease. It is also inevitably
specific in the lowest, and, therefore, the strongest sense :
e.g., in localization.
And with regard to inflammations generally, I know of
none to which the local treatment is inapplicable; and if
I am not too sanguine, in most, cases of congestive inflam
mation the Veratrum Viride is as easy a specific as Arnica
is in bruises, and will introduce a simplicity into ordinary
cases of internal inflammation, now requiring a medical
man, of which as yet we have no idea. Truly, as the
method costs more trouble than the administration of
Homceopathic tinctures, it need not be used indiscrimi
nately ; but wherever bronchitis or any chest inflammation,
peritonitis, or any abdominal inflammation, or any cerebral,
or spinal, or other inflammation, does not at once yield to
Aconite and Belladonna, and ■ to Veratrum Viride and
Podopliylline, then I should with-no delay apply Veratrum
Viride lotions and baths, and maintain them perseveringly
till entire relief is experienced. Nor need the method be
limited to Veratrum Viride, for AcemA, Gelseminum
Virens, and- in short any and every drug has a local part
�xiv
PREFACE.
to play, and should be put close to its work as occasion
requires. The point to be borne in mind is, that the skin
is the face of all the organs, and of all their diseases, and
that they can severally be reached by rapid specifics
through the skin.
The horizon of my cases thus treated is continually
extending, and I shall hope to present further reports of
these new specifics and their methods, from time to
time.
I must not dismiss this subject without confessing how
much I owe to Dr. Grover Coe’s admirable book on Con
centrated Organic Medicines, a book distinguished for me
dical insight, and therapeutical genius as well as know
ledge, and in which I have found everything I have here
laid down inculcated, excepting the specificity of Hyd
rastis to small-pox, and of local applications to all organs
labouring under perilous diseases. Dr. Coe, indeed,
constantly mentions local applications, as of Baptisia to
Phagedenic Erysipelas, &c., &c. ; but the systematic
application of medicated lotions to the whole body, and
its several parts, I have not found in’him, and I suppose
the practice on a large scale is peculiar to myself.
To
Dr. Pattison also I owe much of my knowledge of the
American drugs, and I think I am right in stating that
we are not far apart in our method of local administra
tion.
To Mr. Skelton, sen., of Great Russell Street, I
am also indebted for an unstinted share of his varied
therapeutical experience, though he has been treated so
shabbily by the doctors that I wonder he should have let
me inside his door.
And here a word may be excused on Mr. Skelton’s
recent history, as he has imparted it to me. Mr. Skelton
is a medical eclectic in the American sense of the term;
that is to say, he employs all the vegetable products and
principles, so far as he knows them, in the treatment of
disease; he is also a thorough English herbalist. He
�preface.
XV
repudiates mineral medicines.
He is perhaps the most
fearless apostle of medical freedom in this country, and
longs to extend the blessings of health-education, and the
best and safest practice, to the working men and women
of England. In this respect he is just the sort of man that
Garibaldi would like to know.
Some four or five years
ago he wished to become a member of the Royal College
of Surgeons of England as by law established, and for
this purpose he qualified himself by an attendance upon
the lectures and hospital practice which the College pre
scribes before a man is entitled to be examined for his
diploma. And then he sent in his papers, and proposed
himself for examination. And now, dear public of these
reputed free islands, will you believe it? he was in
formed that he would not be admitted to examination
unless he recanted his eclectic and herbalist faith, and
publicly admitted the superiority of the orthodox practice
to his own.
This he could not do; and not being able
conveniently to go to law with the Royal College, he
remains plain John Skelton, sen., as he was.
By this act the College declares that it is not only a
body for granting degrees of competency ascertained by
examination, but also a tribunal for inquisition into the
faith of those who would be its members, and a corpora
tion of executioners for forcing their faith into the mould
and thumbscrew of its own.
Was this contemplated in
its Acts of Parliament ?
It is a complication in Mr. Skelton’s case that he was
the first to introduce prominently into this country the
Hydrastis, Podophylline, Veratrum Viride, Macrotin,
Caulophylline, Myricin, and in general those American
drugs which the ablest members of the Royal College of
Surgeons of England are now beginning far in his wake
to try to learn to employ, and the use of which he was
asked to recant as the condition of his claim to college
membership.
Is not this matter a providential fulcrum for a move
�xvi
PREFACE.
ment in favour of medical freedom? The College lig
atures its own neck for fear it should swallow the bread
of unorthodoxy: just as some European governments
which have very little food in their parts, tie Custom
Houses round their people’s throats to prevent English
victuals from going down them. We can only hope that
the hunger in both cases will grow, and express itself,
until the straitness of this false rule is terrified into
relaxation.
For my part, as the reader will see, I am no believer
in medical professions, or indeed in professions at all as
successful ways of cultivating any branch of the truths
and goods, the arts or sciences, of nature, of man, or of
heaven. Liberty and the spirit, using all our faculties,
and among the rest the faculty of association, are the
forces which I know are coming from God to supplant
the present state of things. Incarnations, not institu
tions, are the substantial bodies which will constitute
the new world, and open the mighty gates of the divinely-,
human arts and sciences. Gifts not berths will be the
desire and the prayer of those who are permitted to
enter on this new time. And the uses of the world will
be carried on by great and various societies, full of order
and liberty, full of love and of light, full of spiritual and
reasonable endurance, and each man’s character in them
a full and conscious recipient of the gifts and graces of
his art.
When will these things be ? I do not know why they
should be long in coming; for in public power and
respect the professions as by law established, are
dwindling: free trade, and all science, and all voluntary
associations, are examples of what can exist without
them: change has long since begun, and change in our
days is instinct with speeds, as the father of a nation is
instinct with ■ progeny. Courage, therefore, to all who
are in the new way! Half a dozen earnest men, led on
�PREFACE.
xvii
by Garibaldi Skelton, may commence an agitation which
year shall awaken the whole public, produce oneness
of feeling through the several dukedoms of physic, witness
the flight of its despotisms, and annex even the kingdom
of the two colleges to the commonwealth of our art
regenerated.
But now, after all liberation of medicine has been
accomplished, or rather coincidently with every im
provement which will give fair play to the genius of
healing, there remains, in ever new and increasing pro
portions, the exigency of sanitary art and science. This
is to medicine what material and social conditions and
necessities are to morals, their institutions, and their
grounds. This is prevention, while medicine is only
cure. This is the circumambient spirit of health, or
disease, and their widest seed-field.
And if it be taken
to embrace the questions of food and starvation, and of
habits of life, it may fairly be regarded as the most im
portant branch of health-culture.
At present, however, I have but few words to say
about it: and those few chiefly of practical import, as
they have been suggested by my own experience.
Diseases, especially epidemic diseases, have two parents,
a father and a mother; that is to say, an essence or germ
residing in the earth or the air; and a corporeal nidus
or clothing, or obscene vapour or miasma arising from
uncleanness of some kind. Therefore the devil is the
father of diseases, and the dirt of neglect is the mother.
Take away the mother, and the father will still be there,
but unable to breed in that degree. He may breed sin,
inward vileness, perhaps also apoplexies and palsies,
death, vital starvation, all decay from the mental and
spiritual side, suffocation of nobleness and the sense of
God, but probably without his mate, which is filthi
ness, he cannot breed corporeal pestilence. And as we
are bound to be clean first, and to get rid of evil from
�xviii
PREFACE.
the outside, so sanitary science, sewage, drainage, space
of dwellings, and the like, are enjoined upon us by all
our medical commission.
Many people wonder how houses take small-pox,
scarlatina, and the like infectious and contagious com
plaints, seeing that there has been no traceable contact
with those who are suffering from the same. But even
if this be the case, which is difficult to prove, we have
only to reflect that the continuous atmosphere is one
wide repertory of all the miasmas of the world, as well
as of all its better things. These are evidently - most
active, as well as spatially most gigantic; thin, if you
please, to our senses ; but monsters interlocked, and
probably as big as our firmament; and they only await
a womb, a matrix of uncleanness, to engender their
kind in human bodies, and produce all parasitic fevers.
Moreover, it is obvious from constant history, that ever
and anon a new accession arrives from the deep, a new
destroying angel, and a cholera or a new plague is born.
We can chronicle several such advents in our time ; and
the spread of their progeny shows how unclean we
were; how we embraced with our corresponding circum
stances each monster-shape, and how speedily and how
greatly pestilence and death were born. For our posi
tion in the present day is a very undefended one. There
is almost no individuality left; and yet individuality on
the divine side is the one fortress of our bodies, of our
minds, and of our souls. The reason why we, and not
somebody else, have been created, is, that we may be
ourselves, and nobody else. But now everybody wishes
to be according to somebody else; that is, to be some
body else as far as he can. The consequence of which
is, that the human sphere is invaded, pierced and lost.
Kind reader, let us dwell a little on this, perhaps to
you, novel consideration. First, there is such a thing
as the human sphere; that is to say, all our faculties,
�PREFACE.
xix
and all we are, corporeal, mental, spiritual, streams forth.
Each part streams forth in its own order. First, the
Soul streams forth, and being the highest and subtlest
of all, the furthest in its aims, it penetrates through all
the rest, attains its ends of construction, in them rests
most actively, ever on the sense for what infringes ; and
is the outermost covering as well as the innermost essence
of the man. This mighty universe of sphere surround
ing each of us, breathes with our breath and lives with
our life; but also is torn by our violence, and suffers in
our decay. Next, if you choose so to consider it,
though only for illustration, the mind streams forth; 'with
less penetration because it is grosser; to a lesser dis
tance ; and its periphery, far less closely grained, is more
capable of invasion, of rupture, and of decay; even faint
forces of ideas can permanently injure this human
fortress, which so many think is the stronghold of their
being. So, in like maimer as the mind, every instinct
streams forth. So, in like manner, every organ streams
forth: and where each ends, it constitutes a tender
spheral surface which has come through its own spaces,
and is set for ever in the invisible firmament which
guards the man so far as it is intact. Lastly, the bones
and the bodily senses stream forth, and are insphered in
their own creative life; but being the grossest of all,
they cannot penetrate far, but lie folded upon themselves,
like eggs in which all the other world is reflected; and
a very little abused, they are tendencies to denials of the
spheres, because they have so little of their own to
affirm. These facts, which sound at first like wild
assertions, are implied in the very nature of faculties,
which can only be limited by their own ends, and those
ends must be out of themselves; which granted, then
it follows, that tlie soul comes through all the rest, and
has a psychical end in the world, in other words a created
shape there; and if so, a full communication between
�Xx
PREFACE.
that outward shape and itself; in other words, a SoulSphere. And so of the other faculties, q. e. D‘
Now what has all this to do with sanitary science?
For you, good reader, nothing if you please; or, if you
will proceed from spiritual grounds, much. For this
subject of human spheres, and their invisibility, lies
near the root of those causes which pertain to the taking
of disease. In short, we may say, that if the soul
sphere is violated or broken, the man will take spiritual
diseases, mad atheisms, universal lusts, and the like: if
the mind sphere is ruptured, insane mental ambitions
and philosophies will invade, be absorbed, and produce
mental degradation and decay; and if the organic sphere
be broken, bodily miasms will intrude into the nervous
and vital expanses, and epidemic and other maladies will
be taken. Now, these apparently-remote asseverations
have something to do with house architecture.
For it is a rule that nobody ought to be influenced,
except according to his internal essence, by anything or
by anybody. And this rule should be reflected in a
man’s house. The first requisite of a house is, to be
exempted from the world; to have a roof to shut out
the sky, walls to shut out the winds, a door to shut out
mankind; and a floor, with cellars underneath it, and
then a floor again, to shut out the earth, and the earth
sphere. In this way the house reflects the sphere, and
completes the individuality, of the owner.
Now, mark the latter point, about the floor .and the
cellar underneath it. I have noticed in my practice,
that persons inhabiting rooms built directly on the
ground, -with no intervention of underground chamber,
are far more likely to have epidemics and influenzas than
those who tenant rooms separated from the earth. The
power of the earth-effluences is mighty ; and if the
organism is not very strong, is sure to invade it; and
then through the hole of invasion the omnipresent
�PREFACE.
XXI
miasmas, one or more, drive home their impregnation.
Therefore, it is an indispensable rule that so great a cause
of ferment and change as living on the surface of the
active ground, should be avoided.
This holds even where the ground is clean; for the
cleanest earth-sphere getting into a human body is a
calamity and a fall. But where foulness is superadded,
of course the terrible miasms are invited, and commence
their fatherhood.
But sanitary art has much to do after contagious
disease has been already engendered, in claiming power
from the State to limit its excursions. In dealing with
this subject I can only address myself to one crying evil
which has come under my notice. I mean, the practice
of re-letting lodgings after persons affected with con
tagious disorders have occupied them, without any com
plete purification of the apartments having taken place.
If in bad drainage and want of cleanliness are the roots
of these diseases, we may fairly also say, that on infected
walls, and floors, and carpets, and chairs, and beds, are
the seeds which they sow and shed upon the healthy.
I have known a case in which a death from scarlatina
has taken place in a set of apartments; and these after
wards have been let again to an unsuspecting family
with children, who in a couple of weeks have become
the victims of this terrible trap; and the same poisonous
walls have again silently and cruelly communicated their
charge of miasm to another sufferer still, who has barely
escaped- with life from the illness which she took. These
events are of everyday occurrence, especially in the
principal health-resorts, where town children are taken
to enjoy the country, or the seaside.
The only remedy I can think of is a compulsory infor
mation conveyed to the health officer of each district
whenever any infectious or contagious disease occurs in
a house, and power granted to such officer or Health
�xxii
PREFACE.
Surveyor, to see that the out-going infected tenants pro
vide the means necessary for papering, whitewashing, and
sufficiently purifying the tenement they have occupied
during the illness. Also an open registry of such houses
should be kept hi the Health Surveyor’s Office, in order
that persons seeking lodgings may easily know where
they can be safe, and see the length of time that has
elapsed since any house was diseased.
This, I believe,
would have a good effect upon landlords, who, hi their
own interest, would no longer build upon the ground
without a well-ventilated cellar-foundation; and, in short,
would then find that the root of rent is health and clean
liness. At present the reverse is the case; for the more
degraded the population, and the greater the filth, the
larger the numbers of wretched lodgers, whose pittances
in their multitude represent considerable sums for some
hard man who lives in dry decency himself.
It is remarkable that the law is administered for pub
lic sanitary effect in cases of small-pox, while we never
hear of its intervention in the cases of other serious infec
tious diseases. Thus I read in the Birmingham Daily
Post, May, 23,1864, that “ a public caution has been in
serted in the papers informing the public that the expo
sure of a child infected with small-pox in any public
street or highway, is a misdemeanor indictable at common
law, and that the parties committing the offence are lia
ble to fine and imprisonment.” And in the same paper
it is recorded that a poor woman charged with this
offence was brought before the Bench of Magistrates.
Now, assuredly, small-pox is not a worse scourge than
scarlet fever, nor can one imagine a reason why it should
be selected for the action of Parliament, excepting that
it is the worst-looking of diseases.
If there is to be an
action in its case, the powers of that action ought to be
extended to all infections and contagions. And if a pub
lic street or highway is not to be terrified with the sight
�PREFACE.
xxiii
of this repulsive malady, then the private room and the
secure-seeming bed ought to be guarded by the stern
figure and outstretched wings of the State from every
unseen pestilence that walks the noon-day, and every
arrow of destroying miasm that flies in the night.
Here, in short, would appear to be the true realm for
State protection and State interference; nay, even for
State espionage. These powers, despotic and suffocative
when applied to the regulation of arts and sciences, in
dustry and culture, professions, trades and services, are
not only justified and benignant, but indispensable in
their proper sphere; in the protection of the equal rights
of individuals; in the wielding of common powers such
as no individual possesses, for the public health; and in
making it the interest and policy and necessity of each
person to set his house in order, and, by so doing, to con
tribute to the physical welfare of his neighbour. Right
eousness thus completely sought by the State in the ma
terial degree, will educate the public to exact from
medical bodies of its own creation, diligence and skill,
clairvoyance, inspiration and world-wide knowledge, and
godly humility and boldness, which will effect what can
be done in the way of artificial healing, and prepare the
way for things better still.
76, Wimpole St., W.,
and 4, Finchley Road, N. W,
May 24, 1864.
��I.
Small Pox.
It has been my good fortune, thank God, to discover a
method of treating small-pox and erysipelas in their
severer forms, and I now proceed to lay some details of
my treatment before the public.
The Hydrastis Canadensis, a drug already renowned
m the alleviation of cancer, having been first employed,
I believe, for that purpose in this country by Dr. Patti
son, is the remedy which embraces something like a
specific treatment of small-pox within its marvellous
scope.
It is now about five years since I treated Mr. E., a
gentleman living in Acacia Road, St. John’s Wood, for
this disease. It was a pretty severe attack, though not
confluent. The itching and tingling of the face at the
time of maturation, were so distressing, that I was sent
for specially to know if I could recommend any local
application. Recollecting the power which the Hydrastis
exerts upon irritated mucous membranes, and upon
irritable wounds and surfaces generally, I ordered the
face to be dabbed with a cold infusion of the Hydrastis,
a small portion being warmed for each application. The
relief Mr. E. experienced was instantaneous as well as
complete and lasting. The swelling of the face also
subsided quickly; and the case proceeded with more
than ordinary rapidity to a happy issue.
No second
1
�2
A NEW METHOD
case occurred in the house: a point of importance, which
I request the reader to bear in mind.
The next case I will record occurred last summer,
when I was called back to town to attend a friend, who
was the subject of a formidable attack of confluent small
pox. When I first saw him, he had been under treat
ment for several days by a colleague, who visited some
of my patients during my customary autumn vacation.
Although the case was so severe, there was no decidedly
bad symptom. However, I had reason for apprehension,
because H. P., Esq., had experienced an attack of scarla
tina the year before, which had much weakened him, and
left his constitution exposed to mischief from so grave an
attack as the present.
When I entered his bed-room, I was shocked at his
appearance. His handsome chiselled features, capable of
a delicate and versatile play which has made him a
favourite with the public, were almost undiscernible in
the huge carneous head, bossed and buttoned all over
with the rising eruption of confluent small-pox. His
eyes were closed up in the general swelling. The erup
tion extended pretty evenly over the body; and in many
parts was confluent there also.
I saw him on the 7th of August, and found general
fever rumiing high; pulse quick; immense congestion
about the head; and all the appearances, were it not for
the varioloid boutons which were so thickly arising, of
intense erysipelas of the head.
I prescribed at once a mixed lotion of Veratrum Viride
and Hydrastis, and gave the same remedies internally
in rapid alternation. Slops and a watery diet were
enjoined.
On the 8th there was still great swelling of the head
and neck; the pulse however was lower, and the same
remedies were continued.
On the 9th, a marked subsidence had taken place; the
�3
OF TREATING SMALL-EOX.
eyes could be opened; the pulse was reduced to 80; the
pustules were changing colour; the face and neck though
encased, occasioned but little suffering. There was hi
fact none of the usual irritation accompanying this
disease.
On the 10th, the improvement was still more marked,
and the fever and local hiflammation had so completely
departed, that the Veratrum Viride was discontinued, the
Hydrastis' alone being applied, and administered inter
nally; and this was continued for some days.
The history of the case is now told: the combat
between the small-pox and the ( Veratrum Viride and)
Hydrastis was ended by the 14th, when weakness was
the only complaint left. I ought to have mentioned that
my friend had been suffering from constitutional debility
up to the period of the attack I am recording, and was
in a most unfavourable condition for either repelling or re
covering from small-pox. Under other treatment, I think
it reasonable to suppose he would have succumbed to it.
After the first subsidence of the fever, I allowed him
wine and beaf tea, grapes, bananas, peaches, &c. &c.,
only limiting the quantity so as not to add gastric irrita
tion to the presence of the existing disorder.
On the 15th, he complained of great weakness of the
eyes, for which he had Euphrasia and Sulphur.
On the 18th, when he ought to have been at home for
my visit, he was away in Kensington Gardens.
No one else in rather a populous house near the Strand
took the complaint, to my knowledge; his wife, whose
face is a familiar one all over England, waited upon him
with tender assiduity, and slept in a recess opening from
his room, and escaped the infection. A devoted friend
came and received his instructions, and spent whole days
with him, and was unscathed.
The chief points I noticed in the case were:—1. The
rapidity with which the erysipelatous swelling accom*
1
�4
A NEW METHOD
panyiiig the disease, and the fever, yielded to the Vera
trum Viride and Hydrastis. 2. The absence of the
customary irritation both on face and body (the lotion
was applied wherever there was swelling or pain). 3.
As a consequence of this, the absence of the usual in
centive to pick or scratch the face. 4. The absence of
the odour which is characteristic of this disease in such
violent cases, involving so large an amount of suppuration
and scab as there was in this instance. 5. The rapid
convalescence in so delicate a patient. 6. The apparent
arrest of the infectious properties of the disease. 7. The
pitting was less than I have seen after such an ordeal;
it rather amounts to a general graining and alteration
of the complexion: in short, there is hardly any pitting,
and not a trace of seaming. What alteration there is,
would, I believe, have been considerably reduced had I
had the opportunity of applying the Hydrastis from the
first, and of stopping the fever and inflammation at the
outset; which might have been done without fail by the
early application and administration of the Veratrum
Viride and Hydrastis.
Case 2.—On the morning of the 13th of November,
1863,1 was consulted by M. W., Esq., who was suffering
under indigestion and malaise, and under some alarm about
small-pox, which was prevalent in the neighbourhood of
Covent Garden, and had attacked one of the work-people
belonging to his own establishment. For some days I
gave him Antim. crud., Rhus, Belladonna, and Aconite,
according to the symptoms present; and the small-pox,
a severe case of the noil-confluent degree, manifested
itself on the 16th. The fever and sore throat ran very
high, and for these he had Rhus and Bell., and Carbonate
of Ammonia in sensible doses. I saw him again in the
evening, and found no dangerous condition, but the same
symptoms maintained.
�OF TREATING SMALL-FOX.
5
On the 17th he was going on favourably, the pustules
were steadily evolving themselves. This gentleman
labours under a polypus of the nose, and perhaps this
circumstance had determined the pustule-producing
irritation more severely than usual to the throat, the
soreness in which was excessive, and the appearance
alarming. Great groups of pustules covered the pala
tine arches, the tonsils, the uvula, and the pendent poly
pus ; and the appearance, to a superficial observer, might
have suggested severe diphtheria m its earlier stage.
The distress was great, and in the evening of the same
day, when prostration set in, I gave him Hydrastis and
Baptisia alternately.
On the 18th a great change for the better had taken
place; he had had a good night, the throat was relieved,
though the pustules were still maturating; those which
studded the tongue all over were comparatively painless,
and the collapse, which had amounted to fainting, had
passed entirely away. He was allowed the Hungarian
wine Carlovitz, beef tea, and fruit, all of which he now
enjoyed.
The irritation of the face, which was considerable,
was, as usual, extinguished by the application of Hy
drastis in lotion; and wherever the accompanying cel
lulitis was severe, the Veratrum Viride did its unfailing
work in a few half-hours. This patient, who is a man of
talent, was struck with surprise at the immediate effect
of the Hydrastis lotions, and never failed to laud the
beneficent drug, and the discovery of its application.
So impressed was he with the rapid relief he had ex
perienced, that he sent the remedy to a poor girl, one of
his factory people, who was suffering under small-pox;
though whether it was applied or not, I have not heard.
He fully admitted what great things had been done for
him.
Under the action of these remedies the case proceeded
�6
A NEW METHOD
most satisfactorily. Irritation and inflammation were
annulled, picking of the face was prevented, and pitting;
the effluvium of the disease was cancelled, and no second
case occurred in the family. On the 3rd of December,
when he had been long convalescent, I saw him for the
last time, previous to his going to the sea-side.
In this case I only regret that I did not use the
Hydrastis from the very first, but waited until secondary
irritation and cellulitis were developed. One lives and
learns; and really, when I treated this gentleman, the
full power and import of these new means had but im
perfectly dawned upon me.
However, it was in this house that it first struck me
that in Hydrastis we have perhaps a prophylactic against
small-pox; a medicinal counterpart to vaccination. Certain
it is that Hydrastis^ locally applied, produces vesicular
and pustular inflammations of the skin and sub-dermoid
cellular tissues, and thus is, to some extent, locally Homoeo
pathic ; as vaccination is surgically Homoeopathic to the
same complaint. Accordingly, I administered to the mem
bers of this family small doses of Hydrastis tincture; and
this practise I shall continue in other cases, secure that
no harm can come of it. Dor experience has taught me
its power over varioloid disease, and if a neighbourhood
is invaded by the poison which communicates small-pox
to susceptible individuals, the whole neighbourhood
doubtless suffers in health and cleanness, though not in
the manner of that specific disease; and the Hydrastis
may counterwork the poison, even as it extinguishes the
formed cases of the epidemic. It seems reasonable that
the best cure to the sufferer should, in appropriate doses,
be the best preservative and tonic to the non-sufferers.
And though the point is difficult to prove, it is well to
persevere in the practice.
But perhaps one reason of the difficulty of proving the
preservative virtue of Hydrastis against small-pox may
�OF TREATING SMALL-POX.
7
be, that Hydrastis lotions and baths, by saturating,
coating, and altering the scabs, pieces, and dust of the
infected surface, do actually kill the reproducing powers
of the said morbific parts and particles. This may be
proved by experiment, by trying inoculation with small
pox matter with and without a mixture of Hydrastis;
and I commend the demonstration to the small-pox
hospitals. In the same manner, it seems probable, that
any remedy which will extinguish a disease, will also
destroy the infectibility of its particles and effluvia,
which opens a wide field for the application of Hydrastis
Baths in small-pox, and in those who fear it; of Bella
donna Baths in scarlatina, &c. &c. &c.
Case III.—On November 25, 1863, I was visited by
Miss L. J., set. 23, who was suffering from a sudden
acute pain in the back, and a blotchy, almost continuous
red eruption, not unlike measles, on the legs and thighs,
accompanied by great prostration. I prescribed Rhus
and Capsicum.
On the 27th she visited me again; her symptoms
were unchanged, but the rash had extended and had
become scarlet. Continue Rhus and Capsicum.
I was called to see Miss L. J., at her own home,
69, St. John’s Wood Terrace, on the 29th of Novem
ber, and found her labouring under small-pox, un
interruptedly confluent on the face and arms; while
the legs, thighs, and lower body were covered with an
eruption of purple petechial spots like the worst form of
measles. The eruption on the face and arms was one
shining vesicular button-work, accompanied already with
much swelling. I prescribed Phosphorus and Veratrum
Viride and a lotion of Veratrum Viride and Hydrastis
.combined, to the skin externally.
December 2nd. The eruption proceeding; pulse 98.
She seems weaker. She left off the Veratrum Viride
�8
A NEW METHOD
and used Hydrastis alone and Hydrastis lotion. I saw
her again in ’ the evening; and only chronicled in my
note-book, “Fearful eruption. Hydrastis, wine and
brandy.” The patient is literally enveloped in a huge
bag of small-pox. Hydrastis lotions all over face and
body frequently.
December 3rd and 4th. Matters remained unchanged;
she still lived, and the eruption developed itself. On the
4th I learned that she had had her period ever since the
attack began. Continue Hydrastis in alternation with
Sabina.
December 5th. Already the eruption is peeling well
on the face. She has a most distressing cough, and her
voice is nearly lost; the period still continues. She is
to take Hydrastis, Bryonia, and Baptisia.
December 6th. The eyes and face are appearing; she
has no itching, and consequently no tendency to pick
herself. There is no pitting in the spaces where the skin
now begins to be visible. Immense development and
size of the pustular covering, for there are no distinct
pustules on the body and feet; petechial blackness, like
dark blood and water, over the whole of that part of the
eruption. No irritation; no secondary fever; no delirium
at night. Her cough and laryngeal symptoms continue
severe. Continue Hydrastis with Hepar Sulphuris, and
Hydrastis lotions to the whole body.
December 7th. Her throat symptoms are worse; pulse
96. Constant laryngeal cough. Her face continues to
peel; she still has no itching, and complains of nothing
but a heavy strap or saddle of scab on the nose and lips.
I administered Belladonna and Hepar, and occasionallv
also Baptisia and
Viride.
In the evening I paid her a second visit, and found
the cough much relieved; a result which she attributed
to the Veratrum Viride, which has a great expectorant
and resolvent power, Continue the Hydrastis ablutions.
�OF TREATING SMALL-POX.
9
December 8th. I could report her better; cough re
duced; no fever; no delirium; no itching; and what
struck her mother, who attended upon her, there was no
unpleasant odour from the skin, although the quantity of
sanious suppuration, modified only by the Hydrastis,
could not be exceeded on the same space of skin.
Dec. 9th and 10th.—Going on favourably. She is,
however, depressed about her future prospects. She is
a public singer, and has long been overworked and ex
hausted, and always of a delicate frame and health.
To-day her voice is low. The eruption peels apace. Con
tinue Hydrastis, and Veratrum Viride.
Her mother also has one spurious but decided pustule
on the arm, together with pain in the back, and general
malaise. She dabs her daughter all over with the lotion
many times a day, and doubtless has been inoculated
with the disease.
Dec. 11th.—Bryonia was given occasionally for the
cough; also Hydrastin for the conjoint purpose of specific
to the disease, and tonic to the stomach.
Dec. 17th.—Going on well; but weak. Hydrastis
and Xanthoxyllin.
Jan. 5.—Wonderfully well, and little pitted: there is
only one deep pit on the face, where I myself pulled off a
piece of the coating; the rest of the skin exhibits a fine
graining, which will be almost imperceptible in a twelve
month. I gave her Hydrastis, n. 30, in pilules, to go on
with, to keep up the general action of this benign drug
upon the system.
There are one or two points in this case which require
to be brought out into greater prominence. And 1st,
as to one which I have omitted till now—the diet.
Throughout the disease she had beef tea, port wine, and
brandy ad libitum, even at first, when the swelling and
inflammation were at the height. The case was erysipe
latous, typhoid, and putrescent, and happily responded
�10
A NEW METHOD
to free nutrition and stimulation. 2nd. The Hydrastis
lotions, the strongest that could be made, were most
assiduously applied, and always with a feeling of comfort
to the patient. The main treatment of the disease was,
I believe, local. At one period of the complaint, the
lotions to the legs, which were uncovered for the pur
pose, produced a chill that it was desirable to avoid; and
these lotions were therefore abandoned for a few days.
Doubtless, as a general rule, they ought to be applied
warm.
In the course of this case, another sister took scarlet
fever, for which I treated her. I mention this to show
the state of the house (69, St. John’s Wood Terrace),
in which L. J. was attacked by small-pox. A few
weeks previously a person had died of cerebral typhus
on the ground floor; also a child, which I did not at
tend, has since died of scarlatina on the second floor;
and two of L. J.’s sisters took scarlatina and recovered
from it. The drains of the house smelt abominably; and
all the circumstances conspired to produce the putrescent
type of small-pox which I have recorded. Nevertheless,
among L. J.’s numerous family, cooped up in one small
landing, no second case of small-pox occurred, excepting
the case of Mrs. J., by inoculation.
The marvellous power exerted by the Hydrastis over
the irritation and itching which constitute one of the
most troublesome features of this disease, extends also
to the similar symptoms in chicken pox; in which, how
ever, a weaker solution can be used, especially in the case
of children. The terrible itching of jaundice I have also
relieved at once by lotions, or still better by a medicated
bath, of Veratrum Viride.
Had one all the conveniences which exist in first-class
houses, or which are at hand in a small-pox hospital, my
treatment of small-pox in any bad case would be very
simple. As soon as the disease is recognized, and if pos-
�OF TREATING SMALL-POX.
11
sible before the eruption appears, I should give Veratrum
Viride and Hydrastis internally; and when the eruption
is declared I should continue them, with sufficient energy
to control the fever, and reduce the swelling of the parts;
and chicken broth, mutton broth, beef tea, wine and
brandy, as sedatives, and to keep the stomach alive and
active for the great demands made upon the vital powers.
Notwithstanding the apparent incongruity of the two
practices, I find them answer well in typhoid erysipelas
and carbuncle; and I know they will not disappoint us
here. Then I should give immersion baths, at 96 deg.
and upwards, of Veratrum Viride and Hydrastis in com
bination at first; a bath every six hours: sponging the
frame also with lotions of the same, at intervals accord
ing to the exigency of symptoms and circumstances. If
the baths cause faintness, supply strength by judicious
stimulants. The fever and swelling soon subsiding, I
should rely upon Hydrastis baths, and lotions, and upon
the internal exhibition also of Hydrastis ; supplementing
it where needful by other remedies. Of these, perhaps
the most valuable where stomatitis in its worst form
occurs, or where the typhoid and putrescent tendency
threatens more and more, is the Baptisia Tinctoria, a
God-sent addition to the armoury of medicine against
fevers. The baths, I have reason to believe from what
I have seen already, would cut short the disease, and
probably render the one-twentieth part of the eruption
which would be left, amply sufficient to satisfy Nature
in her presumed expulsion of materies morbi, so necessary
in theoretical medicine. For I apprehend that the ex
tension and maturation of the pustules may fairly be a
local development and infection; and thus that there is
no more harm in arresting the greater part of the erup
tion, than there is in curing itch or favus by local
administrations.
These new medicines I have used in the concentrated
�12
A NEW METHOD
tinctures, but in small doses. Knowing as I do the truth
of the Homoeopathic law, and the power that infinitesi
mal doses exert under that law, I shall not be surprised
to find that dilutions produce excellent results internally
in small-pox; yet I have thought it safest at first to
handle powers which are unmistakeable.
Thus it will be seen I would treat the case simply as a
form of erysipelas from the beginning, and no more
think of allowing it to run its course, than I would allow
erysipelas to pursue its destructive way.
Time will
show how far the disease can be extinguished after it has
declared itself; but I believe it can be extinguished in
any stage, though best, of course, nearest to its commence
ment. If it can be thus cut short, the Veratrum Viride
will be the prime agent in producing this effect. Other
wise, when pustulation has occurred, and when the ac
companying cellulitis has given way to Veratrum Viride,
the Hydrastis is the remedy to be relied on for neu
tralizing the developed materies morbi, and abolishing its
irritation; also for coating it, and preventing its diffusion
and re-absorption.
When one comes to think of it, the spread of zymotic
diseases in the body itself, by combined infection and
contagion, seems very probable. From my experience,
I infer that part after part of the organs and tissues
catches the small-pox; and that each pustule enlarges
by the same law. A little leaven, after the disease
becomes palpable, leavens the lump. If this be so, the
disease should be arrested in its centres of development;
which I have already proved to be possible hi several
stages.
For in the cases I have treated, the disease has been
struck dead (if I may use a strong expression) just at
the point where the Veratrum Viride and Hydrastis were
used decisively; and the removal of the destruction has
been the only work remaining to be accomplished.
�OF TREATING SMALL-POX.
13
The complications in the last case (L. J.’s) were suffi
ciently formidable. The most unhealthy circumstances,
a pestilential house, petechial eruption, menorrhagia,
intense laryngeal and bronchial irritation, confluent
small-pox; yet all these conditions yielded to the com
bined powers of Veratrum Viride and Hydrastis; and on
the 21st of March of this year I had the delight of
meeting L. J. at my door in blooming health; the cutis
unattacked, and only the surface of the complexion
grained and slightly reddened by the disease.
Since L. J.’s recovery she has resumed her public
singing, but her voice is quite altered from soprano to
contralto; what voice she has got is much stronger than
it was before. During the disease her eyebrows came
off, but they have now grown again. She told me at
our last interview that she never felt any pain all the
time she was ill.
The method of treatment with Veratrum Viride
baths, is, I feel convinced, equally applicable in scarlatina;
and from the huge diaphoretic power of the drug ad
ministered internally and externally, I should expect it
to produce resolution in the most serious anginose
affections of the throat. I speak especially of cases
where Belladonna is insufficient.
In the small-pox in sheep, a very destructive disease,
and one which it behoves us for sanitary reasons to re
gard very anxiously, the same remedies could easily be
applied to whole flocks. Any number of sheep might
be driven through Veratrum Viride and Hydrastis baths,
with a small cost of labour several times a-day, and the
disease be limited, cured and extinguished. I commend
the subject to Professor Simonds, the Royal Agricultural
Society of England, and the Veterinary College.
The Hydrastis ought to be an inexpensive drug; the
swamps of Canada, stimulated by the wants of this side
of the water, will speedily yield enough to treat the
�14
ERYSIPELAS.
whole small-pox cases of the world. The Veratrum
Viride in its concentrated tincture is a little more
costly; but I presume it can be supplied of uniform
strength to almost any amount from the laboratories of
Messrs. Keith, and of Messrs. Tilden, of New York.
But I strongly advise the public to demand the American
preparation, and not to be satisfied without an assurance
from the chemist that the concentrated tincture is not of
British manufacture. Of the English preparation I only
know that it has neither the appearance nor the qualities
of the American, and that time and even life may be
lost by using it.
II.
Erysipelas.
The triumph of Veratrum Viride locally applied to
pure erysipelas, is as complete as the art of medicine
can desire. Diversity of cases of course requires cor
responding diversity of treatment; yet, from no slight
experience, I can declare that the Veratrum Viride is a
cardinal remedy in the disease now in question.
The first case in which I employed it was that of a
girl, servant to Lewin, the chimney-sweeper, of St.
John’s Wood. She came "with a raised erysipelatous
swelling on the forehead, exquisitely painful, and rapidly
extending. I painted it over with a camel’s hair brush,
•with the concentrated tincture. She returned next
morning, and reported the almost instantaneous subsi
dence and disappearance of the complaint, which never
returned. Since then I have known no case of failure
with this drug locally applied in erysipelas.
When I remember my old days of treating this dis
order, and the terrible cases I have witnessed—cases
rendered terrible by the inefficiency of the means at
�ERYSIPELAS.
15
hand for their suppression, and in which the best treat
ment was the disfiguring method of painting over the
whole head of the patient, scalp and all, with lunar
caustic,—when I remember these days, I am thankful
that a means so simple as a lotion of Veratrum Viride.,
coupled with plenty of stimulants and concentrated
nutriments, should avail to arrest the complaint, and
extinguish it rapidly, without suppuration, with no
suffering, and at small cost to the vital powers.
Case I.—May 21, 1863, I visited Miss M., in the
village of H., near London. She had been labouring
under erysipelas for some days, and I found her in a
typhoid state, with the pulse weak, quick, and fluttering,
the manner hurried, the tongue fleshy red, and dry hi
the centre; and vesicular erysipelas, with painful bulging
swelling considerably developed on the face and the
forehead. She is evidently a person of very feeble con
stitution. I prescribed Belladonna and Rhus internally,
and lotions of Veratrum Viride to be kept constantly
applied to the swelled parts.
Beef tea, brandy, port
wine, and the Hungarian wine Carlovitz, were taken in
alternation, according to want and weakness. I visited
her again at night, and ordered her to continue the same
treatment.
May 22.—Miss M. is better; the swelling subsiding.
There has been no action on the bowels for several days.
Podophyllum and Rhus internally; Veratrum Viride.) ex
ternally. Soups and stimulants continued.
May 23.—The swelling abated, but the face of a dark
purple hue; Arsenicum and Rhus internally.
May 24.—Going on well; but during this and many
subsequent days flushes of erysipelas of the area of a
hen’s egg occur in various parts of the scalp, and are put
down and smoothed away by a cap of Veratrum Viride
lotion.
�16
ERYSIPELAS.
May 25.—The right ear is attacked, and the swelling
promptly taken down by the same means. The Arsenicum
and Rhus are continued the meanwhile.
May 26.—I paid her an early visit, and found her
labouring under great prostration. Hydrastis and Carlo
Vegetabilis were prescribed. Saw her twice that day.
So also on the 27th. She then had a painful cough and
laryngeal symptoms. I gave her Cocculus and Apis,
and an occasional dose of Bromine, which I find to be a
first-class remedy in laryngeal as well as in pulmonary
complications. There seems no doubt that the erysipelas
is flying from organ to organ, and from the skin to the
internal parts. She continues the local application of
the Veratrum Viride wherever the disease appears, and
always with speedy result.
May 28—30.—She improves; but there is still prostra
tion, and dry tongue, with considerable soreness of the
mouth; also drowsiness, and apathetic countenance. I
gave her Baptisia and Opium, and on the 31st found her
decidedly mending. On the 3rd of June she had Bap
tisia and Myricin in alternation for the sore mouth and
dry tongue. On the 5th the tongue was healthy, and
she continued the Myricin, but in combination with Nux
Vomica. I took leave of her on the 8th of June, when
she was fairly well, and in excellent spirits.
This case may be considered in a twofold aspect. First,
as a case of nervous gastric fever with a strong typhoid
tendency. Secondly, as a case of erysipelas of the face
and head. I have seldom seen a more threatening case hi
both regards than was Miss M.’s at the beginning. The
treatment was twofold; local and general. The general
treatment, to anticipate a question in the medical reader’s
mind, did not arrest the erysipelas, which reappeared
in part after part, travelling about over the face, neck,
and cranium. The Veratrum Viride in a few hours did
arrest it, and ultimately suppressed and extinguished it.
�ERYSIPELAS.
17
No suppuration occurred, and no subsequent delicacy or
soreness of the parts; no tendency either to return of
the disease. My patient also has been remarkably well
ever since.
T&e Baptisia was of evident service in arresting the
typhoid tendency which displayed itself throughout a
large portion of this case. It is an admirable remedy
where Rhus does not succeed, and is very valuable as a local
application to sores that threaten a gangrenous termination.
This case lasted eighteen days, from the beginning of
my treatment to the convalescence: an unusually short
period, considering the feeble constitution, the intensity
of the local disease, its obstinacy of re-appearance, and
the typhoid complication; considering also that I was
not called in until the disease was dangerously established.
Case II.—In January, 1863, a low type of fever attended
occasionally with erysipelas, prevailed in my neighbour
hood, and afforded me several opportunities of putting my
local treatment successfully in practice. Of these cases I
have no detailed notes: only a register from day to day.
The following are some particulars of them.
Jan. 14th.—Caroline Bray, get. 3, was seized with
fever, and swelling (erysipelatous) of the vulva, for which
I prescribed Aconite and Belladonna, and cold water on
rags to the part.
Jan. 15th.—The parts are better, but covered with
white blisters. Bell, and Rhus.
Jan 19th.—Erysipelas on the body. Bell, and Rhus.
10 drops of brandy in water frequently.
Jan. 22.—Drowsy and costive. Podophyll.
Jan. 23rd.—Low and comatose. Leg and foot much
swollen. The erysipelas moving upwards. Great suffer
ing. Bell, and Veratrum Viride.
Jan. 24th.—No better. Erysipelas extending up
wards. Cough. Aeon. and Bryonia.
2
�18
ERYSIPELAS.
Jan. 25th.—Relieved.
Jan. 26th.—Transfer of disease to windpipe. Seems
dying. Injections of wine and beef tea:—Bromine, Apis,
and Sulphate of Atropine.
Jan. 27th.—-Relieved. Continue.
Jan. 30th.—A large blister has appeared on the feet.
Bryonia and Rhus.
Feb. 1st.—Erysipelas on the head. Sleepy. Bell, and
Tart. Emet.
. Feb. 2nd.—Sloughing. Ulceration of the foot. Ery
sipelas going on. Continue.
Feb. 3rd.—Erysipelas all over the body. Veratrum
Viride lotions all over. Bell, and Phosph, internally.
•Feb. 5th.—Relieved. Mercurius Corrosivus lotion to
foot. Continue Veratrum Viride to the whole skin.
Feb. 11th.—Abscess in the neck. Continue.
Feb. 13th.—Abscesses. Calcar. Phosphorata. Con
tinue Veratrum Viride.
Feb. 23rd. Continue Calcar. Phosph, and Veratrum
Viride. In a few days after the little patient was pretty
well.
This case, of typhoid fever, with a complication of
erysipelas, which traversed the entire skin, and visited
some of the internal organs, was virtually cured from the
first application of the Veratrum Viride. I pursued
the travelling fire from part to part, and trod it • out un
failingly under the feet of this drug. None of the other
medicaments appeared to me to face the disease;—the
Veratrum Viride previously tried internally was not
effectual.
Let me add, that this patient lived in a
neighbourhood that might well be a nest of fever; and
had a very bad constitution to begin with. My first
experience with her had been to cure her of a scrofulous
swelling of the bone and periosteum of the thumb, at
tended with ulceration—and for which amputation was
proposed—by lotions of Mercurius Corrosivus. Brandy
�19
ERYSIPELAS.
and wine were given freely throughout the above case,
and nutrient injections persevered with. Had I to treat
the case again, the differences would be, that I should
employ the Veratrum Viride from the first; and that
instead of the Mercurius Corrosivus lotion, which how
ever did service, I should use a lotion made with
Cantharidis. The reason of this latter will appear in
the subsequent pages. I did not use the Veratrum
Viride earlier; because, up to this case, I had always been
accustomed to paint it on the surface in the concentrated
form, and the surface here was too extensive: this de
flected my mind from the Veratrum Viride. It was,
however, with this child that I made the discovery
that Veratrum Viride lotions are so effectual in even the
worst cases of typhoid erysipelas, provided stimulants
and nutrient broths are given persistently. The injec
tions of wine and beef tea kept the child alive till the
Veratrum Viride arrived on the scene.
It would also be well, whenever such cases occur, to
employ the warm bath every six hours, medicated with
Veratrum Viride.
Case III.—Jan. 16th, 1863.—I was summoned to
Mrs. D., my coachman’s wife, already under medical
treatment for erysipelas of the head, and rapidly getting
worse. Rhus, and Bell. Brandy and Burton ale. Her
baby at the breast also has the same disease.
Jan. 19th—Erysipelas better, but dry, baked tongue.
Arsen, and Rhus.—Baby: Bell, and Rhus.; and brandy,
ten drops every two hours. It is hardly necessary to
pursue the daily register of these cases. They were
treated with the usual remedies, but also the Veratrum
Viride lotions were persistently applied, and with the
best results. The disease had done some of its destroy
ing work before I saw the patients; and hence the con
valescence was prolonged, and the baby had large
*
9
�20
INFLAMMATION OF THE SPINE.
abscesses on the body, which, however, healed easily,
and have left no bad health behind them. The efficacy
of the remedy at a late stage of the malady, seems
comfortably established by these three latter instances.
I will now give a few cases illustrating the action of
Veratrum Viride as a local remedy in various inflam
matory complaints.
III.
Inflammation of the Spine with Rheumatism.
Master K. C., set. 6, has been ill since the 1st January,
1864, when he took a severe cold and had violent shiver
ing : from this he partially recovered, but on the 15th
relapsed, had pains in the limbs and lower part of the
stomach, swelling of the joints, and flat red spots on the
skin, with lossof power in the legs. Since January 22nd, he
has been attacked with rheumatic pains, and when I paid
him my first visit on January 27th, I found him sitting
half-up in bed, and was informed that he had passed a
night of great suffering. He was feverish, and pulse 120.
He could not stand without being quite held up, and
indeed had lost the use of his legs. This led me to
examine his spine, where I found the pain was concen
trated ; and in a portion of the lumbar spine I detected
extreme tenderness on pressure, and even on contact,
betokening acute inflammation. I at once ordered baths
of Veratrum Viride, the same remedy locally to the
pained part as a constant application; and Veratrum
Viride and Podophylline internally, at short intervals.
Jan. 28.—He was greatly relieved. All the pain in
the spine was gone. He had no tenderness on pressure.
His pulse was 84, and he was able to stand by himself.
Jan. 29th.—He was well except a remainder of
�INFLAMMATION OF THE WOMB.
21
rheumatic cold (for which I left him Bryonia and Ledum);
and a thick rash covering the loins. Here the case
terminated, I saw him no more; the rash gradually sub
sided after his taking considerable quantities of port
wine and nutriment; and his father has since informed
me that in a few weeks his usual health returned, and
he has been well ever since.
Had I not used the local remedy, the spinal inflam
mation and the consequent paralysis would have lasted
I know not how much longer; had I not used the Vera
trum Viride and Podophylline internally, these formidable
affections might have endured for weeks or months.
IV.
Inflammation of the Womb following Pregnancy.
Some days after her confinement, Mrs. P. sent for me
to relieve the inflammatory symptoms under which she
was suffering. I found high fever, very quick pulse,
and acute tenderness all over the abdomen, but especially
over the uterus; acute tenderness also in the vagina.
The perineum had been ruptured in the birth, and there
was great soreness of the external organs. I prescribed
the Ferafr’wz Viride and Podophylline internally, and in
three or four days all the threatening symptoms had
subsided.
This case occurred some years since, and at that time
I was not aware of the cardinal importance of Veratrum
Viride locally, and by immersion baths to the skin; or I
believe two days, perhaps one, would have done the
work of four. For the last six years I have treated
many cases of uterine and ovarian congestion and in
flammation with the same means, and always with one
result; indeed I can scarcely think that any case of
puerperal peritonitis, taken anywhere near its commence
�22
OVARIAN INFLAMMATION.
ment, would resist the sedative and resolvent powers of
the Veratrum Viride and Podophylline combined, with the
bath of the former medicine, or of both together, ac
cording to urgency.
V.
Chronic Inflammation of the Right Ovary.
Mrs. D., a lady residing in Yorkshire, consulted me
by letter on Feb. 28th, 1863. The account she gives is
that in autumn, 1861, she experienced slight pain only
on moving, and this pain has continued ever since, and
increases whenever she is weak. For the last two or
three months, and especially for the last few weeks, the
pain has been much worse. There has been marked
increase of pain since the 21st of February. On moving
the pain is like a sprain; but often when she is still there
is a shooting pain, which goes through the body with
throbbing, like twitches from proud flesh in a wound.
Sudden movement gives acute pain; stooping causes pain
from a little below the waist all along the right side,
with a feeling like giving way; lifting has the same effect.
Touch does not increase the pain, but pressure gives re
lief. Externally there is a swelled ridge on the lower
part of the right side of the abdomen, just beside the
thigh, it feels firm like a muscle or ligament. For a
week the pain has extended to the hip, and nearly to the
waist. On examination by her medical attendant last
evening, a pufly swelling was discovered a little above
the other, soft, and reaching to the hip. The pain is
worst the first thing in the morning; moving, dressing,
coughing, sneezing, aggravate it. She is now forty-six
years of age, and had no menses from thirty to forty-four.
For two years she has had slight catamenia, lasting two
days, and dark brown in colour. I ordered Veratrum
�OVARIAN INFLAMMATION.
23
Viride locally, to be kept constantly applied; and also
■Veratrum Viride and Podophylline internally.
March 17th. The report is that the pain and swelling
have been much reduced by the Veratrum, Viride. The
higher swelling about the right ovary is almost gone;
and the pain there has well-nigh subsided. The lower
swelling inside the thigh, and the pain there, continue.
There is weakness and pain in the rectum; and for
fourteen days there have been painful internal piles, and
profuse bleeding with the evacuations. She has been
subject to this for many years. Continue the Veratrum
Viride and Podophylline for another fortnight, with
Tannic Acid at mid-day.
April 7th.—The piles ceased rapidly under the Tannic
Acid. The ovarian pain is subdued. The side pain—
arthritic-uterine—is no better.
It seems fixed inside
the thigh and hip, and is always felt in walking. Some
times lately she has had similar pains in the right kneeI gave her Macrotin.
April 22nd.—She consulted me personally, and I found
the status quo described at the last report maintained.
The only phenomenon elicited on examination was con
siderable relaxation of the womb.
She suffered after this from some return of the con
gestive ovarian pain, occasioned, as I presume, by the
shaking of her long journey, but which was again relieved
by the means which were successful at first; and I took
my leave of her on the 11th of May, prescribing Podophyll. and Hamamelis internally, and Tannic Acid occa
sionally for piles, should they recur.
I cite this case, not that the uterine disorder was
cured, but to show how rapidly and readily the super
ficial ovarian symptoms were extinguished by the simple
means which I employed.
The following letter from Mrs. D., whom I had not
heard of for a year, brings the record of her case to the
�24
OVARIAN INFLAMMATION.
present time. At an interview May 3rd, 1864, I found
her still labouring under occasional piles and slight pro
lapsus; the womb somewhat flaccid, and a little low
down; the rectum and its tissues also swollen and
bulging forward. She reports that the piles are always
relieved by Tannic Acid. She looks far better than
when I saw her last, and admits to greatly improved health
in the past fifteen months. As a more radical measure
for the hemorrhoidal sufferings, she is to have Collins.
Canad. n. 12, a pilule at night: Juglandin in the morn
ing, and Leptandria at noon; and of course the Veratrum
Viride whenever the ovarian and uterine swelling
threatens.
“ In February, 1863,1 applied to Dr. W. for treatment
under an affection, which he pronounced to be ‘con
gestive swelling of the right ovarium and surrounding
tissues.’ I was also suffering in another way from what
he designated, ‘ uterine symptoms, of old duration, and
the basis of the rest.’ For the relief of both, he pre
scribed the use of the tincture of Veratrum Viride.
After using the lotion as just directed, with bandage, for
about two weeks, the swelling was dispersed, and the
accompanying extremely painful sensations quite relieved.
On every occasion of their return in any measure, (but they
have never been so severe again since first relieved), I
have re-applied the lotion, latterly in its midiluted form,
(z.e., the pure tincture,) and by painting the part. And I
have invariably found relief. At the end of the year and
three months my general health is much improved, and
though liable still to a recurrence of the old symptoms
after any extra exertion or excitement, I am relieved in
a most important degree from anxiety and sufferings by
having within reach this valuable remedy.”
In the accessions of inflammation which accompany
�MENINGITIS.
25
tuberculous deposits and ulcerations of the bowels, the
Veratrum Viride lotion, covered in with gutta-percha
tissue, will abate the inflammation, pain and swelling with
great rapidity, though it exert no influence upon the
foundations of the disease.
VI.
Earache with impending Meningitis.
Nov. 29th, 1863.—I saw Miss Jessie B., set. 12, and
found her labouring under acute earache, for which I
prescribed Belladonna and Podophylline. When I called
the next afternoon, she was suffering great agony,
and so impatient of delay, that the family sent to a
medical friend in the neighbourhood, pending my arrival.
He agreed with me that the brain symptoms were
serious, and suggested the continuance of Belladonna.
The pains were acute, lancinating and stabbing, on the
middle of the line of the longitudinal sinus; the irrita
bility was extreme, and there was complete intolerance
of light. I prescribed Veratrum Viride and Podophylline
alternately; and also constant lotions of Veratrum Viride
to, in, and around the ear, and also over the whole scalp,
especially over the seat of pain; the lotions to be covered
in with gutta-percha tissue.
Dec. 1st.—Early in the morning I found her much
better; the pains almost gone, and all the symptoms
abated. Continue Feratfmw Viride and Podophylline at
longer intervals: also Veratrum Viride lotions. At night
the pulse had sunk to 80, and she was going on most
favourably.
Dec. 2nd.—Improvement still continues. In the even
ing, however, the earache and headache returned a little,
and I gave her Belladonna and Pulsatilla in between the
other medicines. After this time she had no return of
�26
MENINGITIS.
her symptoms. As a precaution she continued the
Belladonna and Pulsatilla, and then Bell, and Sulphur,
and Bell, and Hepar till the 10th of December, when
she went down into the country.
The Veratrum Viride was the agent in this case which,
on its local application, rapidly cancelled all the alarming
symptoms. I cannot demonstrate this to the reader,
who was not present at the case; but it was clear to the
patient, the nurse, and myself. The other medicines, in
infinitesimal doses, appeared afterwards to exert their
usual beneficial effects. But without the Veratrum
Viride and Pod. premised, the issue of the case in so
congestive and inflammatory a subject, would, I believe,
have been doubtful; and, at least, the duration of the
illness would have been longer, and the consequences
less completely abolished.
I do not know any inflammatory complaint affecting
the body, especially of the more rapid sort, to which
this or similar local and general skin treatment ought
not to be applied. Take congestive inflammation of the
liver. A theoretical account of it is, that the hepatic
nervous centres, the governing powers of the organ, are
weakened by some cause—by exhaustion, morbid poison,
or some other. The nerve-weakness allows the blood to
collect in the non-resistent, or non-contractile blood
vessels; and a blood-swelling of the organ takes place,
congestion, the first step of, or to, inflammation. You
give medicines by the mouth to relieve this state of
things; you propagate a telegraphic, or what they call a
reflex-action from the mouth and mucous membrane of
the stomach and bowels to the nerves of the liver, and so
to the blood-vessels. But why not also, always, a reflex
action from the nerves of the skin over the part to the
liver itself, and so to the liver nerves? Nature in
stinctively prescribes this local treatment. The other
treatment is a mere roundabout compared to it. The
�MENINGITIS.
27
skin over a part is a universal telegraph to the part
under it, and to the nerves of the part. You can most
nearly touch the hepatic plexus by touching the hepatic
skin. The cold water physicians have been better than
the rest here; only that their waters have not been
medicated, and in some cases medication, as with Vera
trum Viride, is an indispensable condition of the more
rapid cure.
Case II.—Threatened Meningitis.—The following is a
more complex case: Master E. P., aged 7, was seized on
the 29th of December with fever, great gastric disturb
ance, and acute earache. Christmas fare blamed. In
the evening he was so much worse that Veratrum Viride
lotions were applied to the head persistently.
Dec. 30th.—No better; Bell, and Merc, and Veratrum
Viride continued.
Dec. 31st.—Agonizing night; great photophobia.
Jan. 1st, 1864.—No better; Rhus internally, and
Rhus externally.
Jan. 2nd.—Afternoon, agonies in ear and head;
threatened meningitis; pulse feeble and intermittent;
Sulphate of Quinine to be repeated at discretion when
the pains come on.
Jan. 3rd.—Three visits; some relief after the Quinine,
yet no solid abeyance of the disease.
Jan. 4th.—Worse; Mercurius: also blistering paper to
the neck and region of the ear. Evening, worse still;
Mercurius, Asclepin and Euphorbin prescribed. Later at
night, all the symptoms worse. To have Glonoine, Aeon.
and Bell., Quinine if sinking.
*
Jan. 5th.—No worse; has had the Quinine several
times. Continue the medicines.
Jan. 6th.—Better.
Jan. 7th.—Much better. Quinine and Castor Oil.
Jan. 12th.—Quite well. The Veratrum Viride did not
�28
PAROTITIS.
act completely here, because the vital force was so
heavily assailed that the supplementary remedy Quinine
was indicated.
Besides Quinine, the Euphorbin and
Glonoine appeared both to Dr. P. and myself to exert a
marked influence on his son’s case, which was indeed
one that threatened galloping decomposition.
VII.
Inflammation of the Parotid Gland.
Peb. 22.—Dr. P. has a swelling under the left ear,
some fever and great malaise, and has too much to do
to be able to be ill many days. Great pain in the in
flamed and tumefied “ Socia Parotidis.”
I ordered
Aconite and Rhus alternately.
Feb. 23rd.—No better. The swelling is large and
tense, and involves the adjacent fasciae and tissues to a
considerable extent. Asclepias and Podophylline pre
scribed, and a hot bath with an ounce of Veratrum
Viride in it.
Feb. 24th. — Greatly better.
Immense sweating
followed the bath. The doctor reports that Veratrum
Viride baths would go for much in training if their use
were known. Continue Asclepias, beef tea, and stimu
lants.
Feb. 26.—No pain left, and scarcely any swelling.
The complaint is cured, and the busy doctor satisfied.
So, also, is his “ Socia Parotidis.”
VIII.
Acute Tonsillitis.
This was my own case. I tried Belladonna and Aconite
for some time without marked effect. My wife looked
�HAEMORRHOIDS.
29
into the throat, and was alarmed by the great swelling,
the dusky purple colour, and the foetor of the breath,
and by the excessive fever. She gave me of her own
prompting ten drops of Con. Tine. Veratrum Viride, and
placed a Turpentine bandage round the throat. In five
minutes I was in a bath of perspiration which lasted the
night. Belladonna acted well on the residue of the
disease. I was well in a day or two. This is some
years since, and before I knew of Veratrum Viride baths
and lotions.
IX.
Idoemorrhoids following Confinement.
Mrs. B. is suffering from this complaint, attended with
considerable external swelling.
She took Nux and
Sulphur internally, and a lotion of Veratrum Viride and
Hamamelis was kept constantly to the part.
The
-swelling abated at once under the application of the
lotion.
In these external applications it is my custom to
combine the Veratrum Viride with any other drug that
is pathic to the case.
The Veratrum Viride does its
general work as skin-opener, de-constrictor, and con
gestion-disperser; the other, if correctly chosen, puts
forth its more specific power. Thus, in injuries to the
face and eyes, resulting in unsightly swelling, I have
found unusually good and quick results from a weak
lotion of Veratrum Viride and Arnica combined.
Perhaps I shock Homoeopathic prejudices by mention
ing the combination of drugs, even in a lotion. Yet
repeated success in healing will justify anything; and
success is the only science of the art of physic. And in
many cases I have found combinations succeed. True,
you do not know which drug did the work: but why
�30
COMBINED MEDICINES.
should you ? when, perhaps, it was the combination that
did it; and when the knowledge of the truths of com
bination may be worth having, and involve a chapter
which Homoeopathy has yet to open:—the practical power
of its drugs combined. If Aconite and Bryonia * are both
Homoeopathic to Pneumonia, why should not the mind,
by a subtle and rapid instinct, build out of the twain a
compound means which will grasp the disease with a
combined force far more than equal to the solitary forces
of these drugs ? There comes a point in which you quit
the science of the probabilities of drugs, the splendid
and enduring fabric of Hahnemann, for the science of
recorded success in cures, to which the former is per
fectly subordmate in human interest; and in this latter
field of knowledge, every means of every school, and the
statistical result of whole schools, comes forward, and
if it deserves so much, is venerated as a fact.
* Apropos of combination, I copy the following from Grover Coe:—
“ Bnt perhaps the most remarkable feature of the Myricin is its power,
in connection with Lobelia, of allaying false labor pains. The peculiar
therapeutic property here manifested is the result of the combination.
Neither will answer the purpose alone. As soon as the pains are ascer
tained to be spasmodic, place the patient in bed, and administer the
following:—
R
Myricin
....... grs. xv.
Wine Tine. Lobelia
.
.
.
.
ss.
Boiling Water .
.
.
.
.
. ? j.
Add the Myricin to the boiling water, and after a few minutes the
Tine. Lobelia. Exhibit at one dose, and repeat in two hours, if neces
sary. This will seldom or never disappoint the practitioner, and rarely
is a second dose necessary. It allays the pains, quiets the nervous
system, and postpones parturition to the proper period. Delivery will
frequently be delayed from one to four weeks, and the matured energies
of the system will then ensure a safe and easy accouchement.”
�ABDOMINAL INFLAMMATION.
31
X.
Inflammation about the Ccecum.
March 21st, 1864.—W. M., Esq., has diarrhoea, with
great swelling and tenderness in the right ileum; there
is also spasmodic pain, and he cannot stand upright, but
is drawn together to relax and favour the right side.
The pulse is quick and wiry. Podophyllum and Vera
trum Viride in alternation. Veratrum Viride constantly
to the part, and in a hip bath at night.
March 22.—He is relieved. He says he felt quite
differently immediately after coming out of the bath.
Continue all the means.
March 23.—Improving fast. A space as large as a
hen’s egg is still hard, and painful on pressure. The
diarrhoea has gone. To have Bryonia and Mercurius;
Veratrum Viride lotion and bath.
March 25.—The swelling has so far subsided that the
chronic basis comes under examination. It appears to
be a thickening of tissues about the coecum. The recent
attack is cancelled. The residual tumour is deep, but
well defined. He is to continue the lotion of Veratrum
Viride, and to go on with Podoph. and Sulphur in
ternally.
March 28.—The lump is now hard and quite deep.
The account he gives of his attacks is as follows:—
First comes a “sneezing cold,” which is apt to recur on
successive days. If it does so recur, sensations of pain,
and pinching, and rumbling of wind begin to be felt in
the bowels. There is evidently a telegraphic relation
between the sneezing cold and the part which has been
now acutely attacked. Probably at some former period
a year or two back, a cold has fixed upon the coecum,
set up inflammation, and produced a thickening there;
or some impaction may have taken place. The sympathy
�32
ABDOMINAL INFLAMMATION.
between the nose and mouth and this part is so great
that (March 25th) the drawing of the breath through
the water in cleaning the teeth produced a temporary
aggravation of pain. Occasionally the pain shoots from
the part quite through the penis. With regard to the'
“sneezing colds,” he says that “he seems to get a
natural secretion in a certain length of time, which it
requires the sneezing colds to remove.”
The recent inflammation being quite removed, he is now under treatment for the deep seated lump. He is
to have Juglandin at night, and Leptandria in the
morning; and to persevere with Veratrum Viride band
ages, to be worn every night.
April 8.—He reports that he was well up to the
evening of April 6th, when he had a new symptom of
pricking in the nose and left cheek bone; then spasmodic
sneezings from 8 to 11 at night, “to sneeze it off.” He
slept well; but on the morning of the 7th of April had
a blown feeling low down in the belly; in the afternoon
a dead pain in the middle of the same region; and in the
evening at half-past 7 sharp pain. At half-past 10-p.m.,
he put on a compress of Veratrum Viride, and a second
at half-past 7 next morning. He also took Veratrum
Viride internally, ten drops at three times. He had no
sleep from 12 to 3. The pains began to cease about
4 a.m. on the 8th, and have gradually gone; and in the
course of the morning he called upon me in Wimpolestreet, and says .that he feels well.
To-day the old lump cannot be any longer felt. “ The
sneezing cold ” has produced none of the usual results.
As a precaution he is to continue the Veratrum Viride
baths, and to mix Veratrum Viride ten drops in ten
teaspoons of water, taking a teaspoonful every four
hours. Moreover, if the sneezing cold returns he is to
bathe the nose and face directly with a lotion of Vera
trum Viride.
\
�IRRITABLE BREASTS.
33
May 5.—He reports that he has had a bad cold ever
since the last visit; a sneezing cold, which comes on for
an hour or two every morning, and to-day has lasted the
whole morning; but only now for the first time pro
duces any soreness of the abdomen, but none of the old
inflammation. He knows nothing of the lump which
troubled him so long. His general appearance is singu
larly improved; instead of the hollow cheeks and stoop
ing gait which betokened a fine man in distress, his face
is beginning to be as substantial as his intention, and his
gait is solid. But these “ sneezing colds,” which are the
door that opens into all his weakness, must be barred
away; and this will take time. He is to have Hydrastis,
2 drops 4 times a day: a Feru&’em Viride bath at
present, and afterwards a dry Fm^nrn Viride apron to
be worn on the abdomen next the skin continually.
XI.
Enlarged and Irritable Breasts.
Caroline G. has been under treatment for some years
for pain and swelling of the mamma?. These symptoms
have been much aggravated of late during her critical
period of life. The breasts are enormous. She tried
Phytolacca for her sufferings, with good effect for a
time. Nothing, however, has so much relieved her as
sponging all over the body with a weak lotion of Veratimm Viride. Had she the conveniences of a bath, I
believe the cure might be complete. As it is, the relief is
remarkable. Being very corpulent, this patient is under
Banting’s drill, and I hope to report of her another time.
�34
LUMBAR ABSCESS.---- BUNIONS.
XII.
Chronic Abscesses.
J. B., Esq., labouring under Angina Pectoris and
Heart complaint, has a large abscess about the left lumbar
region, and another inside the thigh. In both of these
fluctuation can be distinctly felt.
They are increasing in size and are very inconvenient in sitting and
walking. The surgeon in attendance declines to do any
thing, alleging that it will be dangerous, and that they
must be suffered to break. The discomfort, however, is
so great, that I am consulted. Pretty strong lotions of
T eratrum Viride and Quinine in combination abated
suffering, diminished the size of the lumbar swelling,
entirely took away the large femoral collection of matter,
and much facilitated movement and sitting. The gen
eral health at the same time improved considerably; so
that his surgeon complimented him upon his altered
appearance. Mr. B. was very grateful for the amount of
relief. He died suddenly several months afterwards of
his internal disease.
In this case, as I have often seen before, the Veratrum
Viride emulated Iodine in its power of promoting ab
sorption.
XIII.
Bunions.
Veratrum Viride painted on these is generally a rapid
and perfect relief. I have frequently verified this in my
experience. Ihe fact will suffice without citing the
cases. There is no agent comparable to Veratrum Viride
for bunions or inflamed corns.
�MESENTERIC DISEASE.
35
XIV.
Case of Threatened Mesenteric Disease arrested.
On the evening of the 5th of April, I was called to
see Master T. S., ten years old, and found him labour
ing under feverish symptoms, with cough and vomiting.
On listening to the chest, I found considerable inflam
matory congestion of the right lung. The bowels also
were costive.
Imprudence in diet, cherry tart and
dumplings, and a cold, were the probable occasion of
this state of things. I gave him first a dose of Podo
phylline., to relieve the constipation; and afterwards
Aconite and Bryonia.
April 6th.—About 3 p.m.: pulse 170. Acute pain
and tenderness on the whole right flank of the abdomen,
in all the tissues from the liver to the ctecum. The pains
like localized peritonitis: they also extended to the back
and the head, and he cried out with them. He had been
delirious in the night, and had perspiration with the pain.
One costive motion. He cannot stand for pain. The
cough better. Prescribed Podophylline and Veratrum
Viride. Veratrum Viride compresses to the pained parts,
and Veratrum Viride hip bath.
9 p.m., Pulse 78. Pain greatly reduced. Pose easy
and comfortable. Pie has stomach ache, probably from
the Podophylline ; a pain quite different from that just
recorded. Slight pain still from the liver to the caacum,
and all over the belly. He has had some nice sleep.
Continue the medicine at 3-hour intervals. Also the
compresses and bath.
April 7th.-—Pulse 95. Pain much better, but not
gone. The pain on the right side is worst about the
liver, and is less in its extension downwards to the iliac
fossa. He has no cough now, but when he is asked to
cough, the action hurts him. His facies is good. Very
slight pain on the left side of the abdomen. He ex
�36
MESENTERIC DISEASE.
periences great comfort from the Veratrum Viride baths. *
If the pain, which sometimes lancinates about, returns,
the bath takes it away. Continue all the means.
April Sth.—Pulse 100. Great pain from spasms and
gripes: Podophylline pains ? I now, however, learn for
the first time, that he has had spasms in the stomach for
several weeks. He has passed a restless night: his head
aches, and the bowels are constipated. To have Bella
donna and Nux Vomica alternately.
April 9th.—Pulse 100. He has no pain left, and can
bear pressure. Bowels still costive. Aconite 1 dose:
afterwards continue Bell, and AW. A dessert spoonful
of Castor Oil at night.
April 10th.—Pulse 120. A bad night. Dry skin.
Griping pain in the bowels, and distressing aching be
tween the shoulders. Has had Castor Oil twice, which
has brought away a very copious lumpy motion. Hardly
any pain on pressure: the peritoneal and tissue-symptoms
gone; but the intestinal irritation and griping keep up
the pulse. There is a catch in the breath as if there were
a drag somewhere. He is of an inflammatory, and in
regard to congestion and the rapidity of its consequences,
of an almost explosively inflammatory bodily tempera
ment. The face, however, is still good. Bryonia and
Mercurius alternately.
Chamomile fomentations with
Veratrum Viride tincture on the flannel, hot to the belly.
Hot bath with Veratrum Viride, if pain require it.
April 11th.—Hardly any pain or spasms. The ab
domen is still tympanitic in parts. Pulse quick. The
bowels have been relaxed in the night. An old asthma,
accompanied with extraordinary loud breathing, has
been reproduced. Skin hot, but greater tendency to
perspiration. Since I last saw him he has not required
the poultices or bath. Continue all the means as they
are needed.
April 12th.—Pulse 130. Marked delirium in the
�MESENTERIC DISEASE.
rt rj
oi
night. Cough and asthma. Strong pressure on the
abdomen produces no pain. The cloud is now hanging
over another part of the tissues, and falls upon the lung
nerves and the mind-nerves at night. He is to have
Wine Tincture of Lobelia alternately with Belladonna.
April 13th.—Pulse 120. He is in the drawing-room
on the sofa, but cannot get up on account of severe pain
in the back. On examination, there is a protuberance
backwards of one dorsal vertebra, and considerable
tenderness is felt there on pressure. He has been
wandering in the night. His skin is now moist, and he
says he feels much better. Veratrum Viride compresses
locally to the pained spine.
Continue Lobelia and
Belladonna.
April 14th.—Pulse 120. He is now sitting up, and
has no pain in the back. No asthma or delirium in the
night. His bowels have been once moved. Continue
Viride to spine. Let him have a small mutton
chop. His appetite is craving. (Up to this period for
several days he had been taking beef tea and farinacea.)
April 15th.—The mutton chop has done him no good.
Again there is intestinal pain on pressure. He has
passed a restless night, and had two -small motions.
Prescribed: a dose of Castor Oil. Lach, and Coloc. in
ternally : Veratrum Viride compress to the whole belly.
April 16th—Pain less. Pulse 108. Gentle perspira
tion. Continue the Veratrum Viride compresses ooccasionally. Continue also Loch, and Coloc.
April 17th.—My patient is not getting on.
The
abdomen is like a drum, more or less sensitive all over.
For some days past I have been apprehensive of deepseated mischief; more particularly as he has always been
unable to button his waistcoat from a “ swelled feeling ”
about the bowels; and his eldest sister died of mesenteric
disease after measles. It seems too probable that the
�38
MESENTERIC DISEASE.
inflammations which I have successively combated, are
but the outworks of the same disease, which is now
throwing up fresh symptoms, and in their intractability
is showing its own deep and obstinate centre. I am
obliged to communicate my apprehensions to the parents,
who have indeed for some time past shared them; and
have always, as they inform me, contemplated the
probability of mesenteric disease in their little son.
To-day there is back-ache superadded to abdominal
pain. Pulse 108. I ordered Juglandin, from its mild,
deobstruent influence upon Ever, stomach, and bowels;
and Cod Liver Oil.
April 18th.—Pulse 120. There is an increase of ab
dominal pain and swelling. The pain on the right side
of the abdomen is short and breath-hindering. He is
to have compresses of Veratrum Viride, and a bath of
it: and for internal medicines, Juglandin and Leptandria.
April 19th.—Pulse 96. The abdominal swelling and
the pain are both greatly reduced. He can now bear
pressure. His tongue is cleaning, and he has had one
small motion. After the Veratrum Viride bath, he slept
from 9 p.m. to 3 a.m., soundly and sweetly. He looks for
ward to the bath. Continue the bath and the compresses;
the Leptandria and Juglandin, and the Cod Liver Oil.
April 20th.—Master Tommy is up and about. His
skin is cool and perspiring, and he has no pain. He
enjoys the bath. He slept last night from half-past 10
to 7. His appetite is good, but he is to have only slops.
Continue the means diligently.
April 22nd.—Pulse 90. He is convalescent from the
present invasion emanating from his constitutional weak
ness. The spiritus morbi is there, no doubt, but e.anrimt,
act, because the existing materies morbi is dispersed.
His stomach is still high. He sleeps well all night, and
has had one. good motion; and he is going into the
�MESENTERIC DISEASE.
39
country to-morrow. Continue all the means; especially
the Veratrum Viride baths every night.
April 28th.—He came in from the country to see me
in Wimpole Street. His father and mother express their
astonishment, and cannot understand his case; remem
bering as they do, the similar symptoms, but different
issue, of their eldest daughter’s illness. He has now no
pain, and the abdomen is greatly reduced in size; and
we may evidently hope, by carefully watching its
dimensions as a meter of health, to effect a permanent
constitutional cure. His appetite is too good, especially
for bread and butter, which is one of the worst things
he can take, because the dry quantity of it tends to keep
up prolonged exercise of the abdominal functions, and to
fill the tissues with fluid. The liver is not acting quite
well, which perhaps depends on his change to the
country: the motions are light-coloured and hard: one
or two in the day. His prescription is, Silicea 12 every
morning: Leptandria 12 every night: Cod Liver Oil;
Veratrum Viride baths every second night for a week:
afterwards every third night.
Here for the present ends a case which ten days before
appeared to be almost hopeless.
The four remedies
used at last, and which decided the fate of the day: I
mean the Veratrum Viride baths, the Leptandria, Ju
glandin, and Cod Liver Oil, were each called up to the
field as necessity dictated; and I am sure that the com
bination helped each member of it. The case gives
happy hope of the circumscription and final extinction of
mesenteric disease, and shows at least how indefinite
time may be gained for the action of deep constitutional
remedies. But Master T. S. is still under treatment.
�40
EXTERNAL INJURIES.
XV.
Cases of External Injury.
In some cases of external injury, where time is of
great importance, as for instance, where the patient is a
public man, or a professional lady, the Veratrum Viride
is a valuable supplement to Arnica. Locally applied, it
has an undeniable power of abolishing traumatic inflam
mation.
Ihis is a vast convenience for surgery; and
also for medicine; for example, in such cases as peri
tonitis following penetrating wounds of the abdomen;
where the primary inflammation which supervenes is
fatal; and no time is left for the reparative process. In
such cases as these we should combat the inflammation
with lotions of Veratrum Virile^ and support strength
the meanwhile.
It is true I have had no formidable cases of the kind
to treat, but I reason up from the successful manage
ment of lesser injuries. In one case of hurt to the face,
and black eye, the consequence of a fall on the curbstone,
the disfigurement was so far gone in twenty-four hours
that an important appearance in public was made, with
no apology to a brilliant audience, and with the usual
eclat.
XVI.
Dec. 3, 1862, Walter Daws, a?t. 2, had a blow on
the face a month ago, which has caused a circumscribed
swelling, tense and very tender to the touch, on the
cheek bone. It is the result of a bruise of the pe
riosteum, and from the size and appearance of the
swelling, it seems probable that the bone has been
seriously injured, and that exfoliation might take place.
Arnica internally: Veratrum Virile to be painted all
over the tumour.
�EXTERNAL INJURIES.
41
Dec. 5.—Lump a little less.
Continue Veratrum
Viride, washing it off occasionally with a lead lotion.
Dec. 9.—Going on satisfactorily but slowly. Veratrum
Viride alone.
Dec. 24.—'The lump diminished.
Veratrum. Viride
locally.
Jan. 15, 1863, the lump less.
Fhrafr’wm Viride
locally; Plumbum n. 30, internally
Feb. 3.—Improving. Continue Veratrum Viride;
Sepia n. 30, internally.
Feb. 17.-—Langour, and stringy motions. No men
tion of the tumour. Pulsatilla in the day: Mcem’fe at
night.
March 11.—Tumour less. Eruption on the skin from
the Veratrum Viride. To have Sulphur 30 at night:
Mercurius Corrosivus lotion locally. I have not heard of
this patient since; but at the last date the effects of the
injury had well nigh vanished. Had I to treat the case
again, I should probably combine the Mercurius Corro
sivus with
Viride from the beginning; for the
effect of the former remedy on diseases of the bone and
periosteum, even in scrofulous subjects, is very striking.
In one child, I cured great enlargement of this nature
on the finger, and which proceeded to serious ulceration,
with lotions of Mercurius Corrosivus, and Cod Liver Oil
internally; such a case in my youth would assuredly have
gone on to the destruction of the finger, and rendered
its amputation inevitable. For this practice with the
Mercurius Corrosivus I am indebted to Mr. Moore, the
Veterinary surgeon, of Upper Berkeley-street. See the
admirable synopsis of cases which he has published from
time to time.
�42
SHINGLES.
XVII.
Shingles treated by Cantharides Lotions.
As these pages are mainly devoted to local treatment
as superadded to general treatment, I will now briefly
cite four cases which fall under the above heading.
1. Miss R. has an attack of shingles on the back
which yield rapidly to a weak lotion of Ace^m Cantharidis in water. I have no notes of the case, but a few
days terminated it; and there was very little suffering,
and no return of the disease.
2. Dr. P. has shingles on the knee. Two or three
applications of Aceftzm Cantharidis cured it, and no
further crop appeared. The stinging and pain were
reduced to nil by the lotion.
3. Feb. 13, 1864, Miss H. has shingles under the
collar bone, the groups extending across the chest and
to the opposite armpit. The symptoms not urgent or
distressing. Rhus prescribed. The next day an amount
of inflammation and stinging almost maddening occurred.
Acetum Cantharidis lotion prescribed, which killed the
eruption, affording immediate relief. In a few days the
complaint was abolished. The words are decisive, but
they correspond to the facts.
4. Feb. 26, 1864, D. —, Esq., has an unmistakable
crop of shingles on the body. Cantharides lotion exter
nally. Cantharides and Hydrastin internally.
Feb. 27.—The eruption withered.
No suffering.
Continue Cantharides., &c.
March 1.—Well.
These are strikingly homoeopathic results; and the local
application is itself additionally homoeopathic. In the
cases thus treated, the cutting pains, which are often so
persistent and even torturing long after the disease has
disappeared, have no place.
�CELLULITIS.
43
XVIII.
Cellulitus, including Pelvic Cellulitis, its Specific and
General Treatment.
There is an excellent article by Dr. MacLimont, on
“Pelvic Cellulitis,” in The British Journal of Homoeopathy,
Vol. xx., pp. 288-302. In this article, Pelvic Cellulitis,
is defined as, Phlegmonous Inflammation of the Cellular
tissue within the folds of the peritoneum or broad ligaments
of the uterus. Adopting this definition, on which I would
only remark that such inflammation may attack other
parts of the cellular tissue in the pelvis, as for instance
the cellular lanugo which surrounds and embeds the
rectum and connects it to the vagina—but adopting this
definition,—then I would further define general Cellulitis
as inflammation of the cellular tissue in any part of the
body. I am about to cite a case in which Cellulitis was
present from an early period of life, in various parts, and
ultimately in the pelvis; and which appears to be a case
of hope for the treatment of this terrible disease.
Dr. MacLimont says: “Itis somewhat remarkable that
so very frequent and formidable an affection as inflam mation of the cellular tissue of the female pelvis should,
to so great an extent, have been almost completely over
looked by authors on diseases of women.
“It cannot be that this is a new disease, or one be
coming more frequent in all classes of society. Why is
it then, that it is only within the last few years that any
detailed and satisfactory information has appeared of so
distressing, and often fatal a disease, and one, too, of
almost daily occurrence?
“ The reason is, that up to a comparatively recent date,
accoucheurs, both English and Foreign, were wont to
regard the very striking group of symptoms constituting
pelvic cellulitis as so many indications of metritis, peri
�44
CELLULITIS.
tonitis, phlegmasia dolens, &c., whilst those not very
unfrequent cases occurring in the non-puerperal, or even
single state, were too generally referred to cystatis, fibrous
tumour of the uterus, abscess of the rectum, hip-joint dis
ease, mesenteric tuberculosis, ulceration of the cervix, &c.”
This is true; but the Dr. does not inform us why
accoucheurs were thu9 “ wont./’ Great overlookings
of facts generally have interesting reasons. One reason
of the blindness now in question is, that science, among
its many tendencies to disease, has also the tendency to
false definiteness, and to denial of circumambient facts.
Anatomical science begins and is constituted in the clear
ing away first of skin, and next of cellular tissue. And
yet cellular tissue is as universal a high road as the
nerves themselves; and, moreover, a universally con
tinuous expense. It is to the body what space is to the
world, the tension or firmament in which all the organs
are set. Nay, it is in all the organs, and constitutes
everything that they are. And yet science, intent upon
organs, overlooks the material of which they are made;
and by which they are connected, compacted, and asso
ciated in a material sense. As though Astronomy should
deny the stellar interspaces, their imponderable world, the
body of the ether, and the intercourse of the systems.
This is much the same disease in science that has mani
fested itself in history; a few heads and organs of govern
ments, and their lives and acts, have occupied all the
attention due to the life and progress of the peoples; so
in Pathological Science, a few organs have monopolized
the regard due to the universal movements, inspirations,
currents and relationships of the body; and the cellular
tissue which is their channel and their home.
Now among general diseases, of which I. am persuaded
there are troops unrecognized, is this very disease of
Cellulitis; of inflammation of the cellular tissue in the
body, and in any part of the body: a disease which is to
�CELLULITIS.
45
the cellular tissues somewhat as erysipelas is to the skin;
and which like erysipelas may be firmly localized; or
may be fugacious, and wander from part to part; often
leading to suppuration, perhaps in important organs.
When I look back from the teachings of recent expe
rience through a practice of thirty years, I remember
many cases which probably were examples of the disease
in question; but which were regarded as tuberculosis,
complications of pneumonia, bronchitis, pleurisy, and
the various internal inflammations and decays of parti
cular organs. I recollect a family of children who were
carried off by this disease. Of these cases I have no
notes; nor was there great encouragement at the time
to take notes. The chief features in these young persons,
who died from 12 to 16 or 17, was, cellular swellings
in the extremities—inflammation of the subcutaneous
tissues; general feebleness of health; and tendency to
inflammatory colds about the chest; defect of nutrition,
and of sleep; and constant general malaise; then after a
year or two inflammation in the chest-cavity, rapidly
flying from part to part: a kind of smouldering com
bustion which no sooner ceased than it began again in
the same or other parts; and was attended with all the
signs of suppuration; and sometimes with the expectora
tion of pus. The disease also wandered in the stomach
and bowels, and in the abdominal organs; but was less
local than the inflammation of organs, and less rapidly
destructive. . Treatment, from the old points of view,
seemed hopeless.
For at that time I was scarcely aware of the exist
ence of these general diseases in the interior of the
body; and therefore I only applied to the symp
toms specific treatment, and failed to cure, and often
failed to relieve.
Now, however, I know that one
practical fruit of the recognition of such general or cor
poreal diseases, in contradistinction to governmental or
�46
CELLULITIS
organ-diseases, is, the adoption of general measures of
relief, especially applied to the universal skin, which is
the proximate surface of the cellular tissue; the indicator
and regulator of the universal nervous system; and the
medium between the organic and the cellular man.
There are no doubt specifies too for this general disease;
but they will not readily cure without the adoption of
general applications through the instrumentality of the
skin.
In the family just alluded to, there was one singular
exception to the fatal result. The father had died of heart
disease; and one son inherited the same complaint. It
was valvular disease attended with loud regurgitation
sounds-. He had sleepless nights terrible with appre
hension. Once or twice a week he spat up from the
lungs a ball of pellucid tough matter about the size
of a small marble, almost like an uncooked fish’s eye.
His life declined, and sleep was postponed to a later
and later hour in the weary nights.
Pulse about
sixty. Anasarca beginning slowly in the legs gradually
mounted up until he could no longer go to bed, but sat
in his chair all night with his legs and abdomen like hard
boards. For dropsical swellings of the abdomen set in; and
hydrothorax supervened. Just at this time Dr. Rutherfurd Russell introduced the poison of the Cobra (Naja
Tripudians) as a remedy in heart complaints. E. W.,
my dying boy, had it. For the first few days no change,
except that he slept at 11 at night instead of 2 or 3.
Earliness of rest increased upon him. One by one every
symptom disappeared under the action of this single
medicament; and in a few months he was well; and ever
since he has been an upholsterer’s man, and has not
shirked the heavy porterage which belongs to that occu
pation. A remarkable result, when we remember that
his father died of heart disease; and that his brothers
and sisters perished of a decay which seemed to be
deeply present in the family constitution.
�CELLULITIS.
47
But was not his case also cellulitis in some central and
typical sting: not the coils of the serpent crushing the
body, but the unique fang emptied into the heart-valves ?
However this may be, had I to treat the case again, I
should early have used Veratrum Viride baths as a gen
eral antidote, without neglecting the specific Cobra which
stung the sting, and ultimately cured the disorder.
Before proceeding to more immediately practical re
sults, I would specially indicate that cellulitis, besides that
it may belong as a tendency to the universal cellular tissue,
may have a centre of localised mischief in any organ of
the body; and if it pursues its ravages, and travels with
its inflammation and swelling over the more superficial
*
regions, and can be detected through the skin, it also
tends, telegraphically and sympathetically, to invade the
interior of important organs, dwelling in their cellular
parenchyma.
In the case of J. B., Esq., recorded above (see page
34), disease of the heart and cellular abscesses on a large
scale; also cellular swellings in the inguinal and scrotal
regions, were connected with each other; no doubt by
continuity of tissue, and sympathy of structure. The
external swellings were the first symtoms that were
complained of in this case. And in angina pectoris, and
diseases of the coronary arteries, huge cellular indu
rations of the body take place: immense breadth of
shoulders, great board-like expanse of belly; limbs big
as anasarca; filled also with serum; but inflammatory
* Among travelling maladies we note that lesions also travel : as
though the contrecoup could display itself days and weeks after the
injury. I have seen a case of injury to the shoulder, and dislocation,
accompanied by black ecchymosis, travel in this manner: the black
and yellow expanse was some weeks in making its way over parts of
the arm as far as the elbow, which were perfectly normal in colour long
after the concussion. It was like an internal cellular purpura propa
gated from the spot originally injured.
�48
CELLULITIS.
serum in inflamed and hardened cellular tissue. At
whichever end the mischief takes place, there is reason to
suppose that a travelling cellulitis is in its origin and its
propagation: a disease always to be treated where it is
practicable by general measures through the skin.
I met with the remark in one of Mr. Skelton’s books,
*
that disease is only obstruction. Without making a rule
of it, what truth there is in his observation. Y et anatomy
and physiology have hitherto obscured, not illustrated,
the amount of truth. Looking at the channels and tubes
of the body, science has regarded life as a traveller on the
roads. Whereas life here is the roads as well as all the
passengers thereupon. And the roads are movements. So
life flows on in its microcosmal oceans, not through the
trees of nerves, arteries, veins, and ducts, which are but
its rivers, but over and above all through the expanses
of the man. Columns of pressure, and currents of fluids,
and volumes of influences, pass down, and through, and
across the body, not with anatomical, but with emotional
breadth: with the whole heart on the move, not merely
with the pulsatile artery. Life, too, can begin a column
of movement from any centre. But this is a rule:—
wherever any moving column is established, to obstruct
the lower part of it, is to paralyse for the time the whole
movement, and in sensitive subjects, to incapacitate the
man. Constipation in certain cases affords an evidence
of this: in sensitives to this complaint (of which one
every now and then meets with sad specirtiens), the mere
sense of stoppage mounts to the brain, and produces
sometimes acute suffering, and often general incom
petence. In asthma also, where the respiratory column
is impeded, the deep sense of stoppage causes windows
to be thrown open to make evidence of air. And it is
surprising how small a gratification of the sense and
* Family Aledical Adviser, by John Skelton, Sen., Lecturer and
Professor of Medicine, 105, Great Russell Street, 1861.
�49
CELLULITIS.
want of outflow will satisfy the requirements of nature,
and give ease to a patient.
A lady suffering from asthma asked me some time,
since, how it was that during a paroxysm a teaspoonful
of gin and water would occasionally produce a slight per
spiration, and with it an immediate relief to the distressing
symptoms. I answered, that the smallest symptom of
perspiration betokens an entire change in the deter
mination and direction of the fluids within the body.
For when the skin is locked up, the current of the
general life, which tends to surround every one of us
with his own effluences, is shut off at the surface, and
reversed within the body; and being reversed, it tends
back to its sources, and hinders and shocks their flow.
The re-instatement of the right direction—the conversion
of the fluids from the error of their ways—is, therefore,
all that is required in the first instance to the comfortable sense of life within the frame. And a mere indi
cation, a slight perspiration, will effect this marvellous
ciange; polarizing the whole of the given column of
fluids toward outward action, which is the very opposite
of inward obstruction.
These are not scientific, but they are healing truths,
attested in every-day practice, and tending to important
practical considerations: there are millions of such truths
within the same sphere of observation: they in no way
impugn physiological truths founded upon anatomy; but
they imbed them as the cellular tissue imbeds the
definite organs; and prepare them to be covered in by
the skin of the general observation and bodily conscious
ness of poor suffering humanity.
4
�50
CELLULITIS.
XIX.
Case of General and Local Cellulitis.
About Christmas, 1860,1 was called to see Miss E. S.,
and found her suffering from acute local and hysterical
disorder. There was evident inflammation in the pelvic
cavity, and great general excitement. I learned that
she had recently undergone an examination with the
speculum, and had been in torture ever since. The
hysterical symptoms often amounted to catalepsy. Her
voice was gone, and continued in abeyance for four
months.
I attended this lady almost daily for three years, and
I am thankful to say she is now well. Her case is so
remarkable that I will make an abstract of her own state
ment of it which she has drawn up for my use.
Her health since childhood has been poor. At 3
years old she had typhus, which left behind it a swelled
throat. At 12 she was thought to be in consumption;
for which she was bled, blistered, and leeched : fourteen
blisters for twenty-four hours each in one year. Sea air
removed the cough, and till 17 her health was better.
Then inflammation of the chest—bleeding, blistering,
and leeches. On returning home into Rutland she was
greatly afflicted with abscesses, which were treated by
leeches, poultices, the lancet. Her right arm was con
stantly in a sling. When that recovered she suffered
in the same manner from her throat, which was twice
cut: then the right side swelled very much, and the right
leg dragged in walking. At 21 severe scarlatina; and
after that no use in the right leg; its muscles were con
tracted ; she could not put it to the ground. One physi
cian pronounced her a cripple for life. Sir C. Clarke
considered the spine affected, and ordered her to keep
her couch.
After nearly ten years of lameness, and
�CELLULITIS.
51
entire confinement during the winter months to bed and
couch, and after having lost her voice for nine months,
she placed herself under the care of Dr. Jephson, of
Leamington, who salivated her. He succeeded in re
storing her voice, but it soon left again. During this
time she had inflammation of the bowels, for which he
applied forty leeches. “ After a year under his kind
care, she threw away her crutches, and was quite strong.”
He considered the complaint to be “ chronic inflammation
of the mucous membrane with nervous susceptibility and
irritation of the womb.” In 1849, she had a fall, which
bruised the hip and side, and shook her internally; and
taking a long journey soon afterwards, she became pros
trate, no food would digest, the effort to take it caused
fainting; her limbs were stiff and cold, and the right leg
so exquisitely tender that it had to be wrapped up in
cotton wool. She kept bed for two months. Blisters
and galvanism were tried: tonics restored her; and she
was able to resume her arduous duties as companion
to an epileptic lady who was mentally afflicted. In
1852, she was again prostrate, and under the care of
Dr. Marsden, at Malvern, for ulcers of the womb, which
he considered were occasioned by the fall. He applied
caustic, which caused great irritation and inflammation
of the spine, with spasms, and palpitations, and entire loss
of the use of the right leg. Dr. Russell was now consulted,
and wisely ordered mesmerism, which enabled her in a
few months to return to her duties at Leamington. Until
1860, she was able to be actively employed, but suffered
from a bad spasmodic cough in the winter.
On Sept. 7, 1860, she left home for Leamington with
a bad cough, and shortly afterwards passed a long tape
worm, and the cough was relieved; but she was unable
to move in consequence of the pain in the spine and leg.
She was attended and examined by Dr. S. and Mr. P.,
who found induration from piles and enlargement of one
*
4
�52
CELLULITIS.
ovary. Spasms and twitchings of the limbs were fre
quent, and continued till they caused exhaustion. She
came up to London, and the same mesmerism was
again tried, but now it only aggravated the spasmodic
jerking of the limbs. She was examined with the
speculum by Mr. L., which caused her great suffering,
and to use her own words six months ago, she has “ had
internal abscesses ever since. He made the discovery that
it was inflammation of the ovary.” After “intense
suffering, loss of voice for four months, and great pros
tration,” she called me in. I attended her at first in
conjunction with Dr. Pattison, and had the benefit of his
counsel from time to time, whenever local mischief was
urgent, or local irritation ran high.
And now the history of three years can be easily con
densed. The symptoms, which sometimes became in
tense, sometimes declined towards ease if not towards
health, were large and simple. In the first-place the
change of life was being transacted. There was evident
hysteria of a poignant character depending upon most
acute causes. The slightest jar produced an agony; a
little walk at the best of times was followed by an aggra
vation; the shaking of a carriage has more than once
consigned her to her couch for months. The nights
were alarmingly sleepless for these years; and, what
evidently produced the rest of the symptoms, there was
some travelling lesion appearing hi part after part of
the body, and leaving no part unvisited but the head
itself. This lesion was accompanied by evident swellings.
From time to time, there was great swelling over the
region of the womb and ovaries; great swelling about
the hips; swelling almost like lumbar abscess; swelling
of the upper part of the abdomen just under the stomach ;
great swelling of one breast, while the other remained
small; swelling as of anasarca of the limbs—sometimes
of one for weeks, and then of the other. In short, there
�CELLULITIS.
53
was a travelling tumefaction, which seemed to involve
some terrible mischief to one organ after another, as it
passed across their several orbits. Many times did it
appear as if the swelling must burst, internally or exter
nally; and often had the clothes to be adjusted to the
altered shape of the person. The pain, meanwhile, was
that of acute inflammation in its various stages; and,
from the constant element of spinal irritation inter
mingled, the burning was often not less than agonizing,
for long periods together; and, from the beginning of my
attendance, there were abscesses which burst in the
vagina, and, wherever they were situated, discharged
their contents by that passage. After severe attacks of
pelvic inflammation, fresh discharges took place—some
times of pus, sometimes of cores intermingled. These
attacks would last for weeks, and were accompanied by
great swellings, generally of all the accustomed parts on
the left side; e.y., the whole left leg, which once, as the
patient says, “became nearly the size of her body;” of
the whole left abdomen, internally; of the left breast, and
of the left arm. It was clear that there were volcanoes
of inflammation forming ever and anon in the universal
cellular tissue, and sometimes gaining an outlet for their
destructions by the vagina. The bowels were constantly
confined, though I never suffered them to remain so;
but if the homoeopathic deobstruents failed I used castor
oil, injections, or any other means that were necessary.
The state of the limbs was peculiar: for months the
right leg was drawn up, as in hip-disease; the heel could
not be brought to the ground, and any attempt to alter
the habitual position of the limb was agonizing, and led,
that night and the next days, to fresh cellular inflammations. These inflammations generally took place with
rapidity: a few hours sufficed to develop a swelling,
which it required weeks to disperse.
There was
never, however, any redness of the skin, though it
�54
CELLULITIS.
sometimes grew very thin under the increase of the
expansion.
The voice was generally lost when the suffering was
great; but I was almost always enabled to restore it by
breathing upon the larynx for one or two minutes.
There were frequent cataleptic attacks, one of them like
apparent death, during a severe exacerbation of the cellu
litis. The capacity for pain, owing to the spinal and
hysterical basis on which the inflammation was laid, was
extraordinary; but my patient has a mind of impertur
bable cheerfulness, great courage and faith, and a hope
which hopes in subordination, but not dictatorially.
Owing to her inward vitality, the psychical circumstances
were all in her favour.
As the case proceeded, our prospects did not improve.
Air and exercise would have done good, but they broke
the thin crust of health, and the smouldering cellulitis
was underneath: change of air, for the same reason, was
worse than useless, from the shaking of the journey.
About April, 1863, an event occurred which filled me
with apprehension, and from the consequences of which
I saw no escape. In the course of the abscesses, inflam
mation and sloughing occurred between the vagina
and the rectum, and portions of the fasces came with
every motion through the orifice, and passed out by the
vagina. Warm water injections, with Coxeter’s admi
rable syringe, were sedulously used, to render this state
of things tolerable. I communicated to the family that
a lesion had occurred, which might be expected to in
crease, and which might render life a burden, and almost
complete rest inevitable. At this time, the rectum was
the subject of intense distress; the cellulitis was no doubt
in it; and recent haemorrhoids, causing obstruction and
suffering, were superadded. For years previously, “the
action of the bowels had always caused great pain: ” now
the suffering was intense.
�CELLULITIS.
55
The last stroke of calamity which I have described—
this fistulous ulceration—was a fortunate thing for my
patient: it led to what I hope will prove a permanent
cure.
A few months previously, I had read Dr.
MacLimont’s extremely valuable article on Pelvic
Cellulitis, and had understood Miss S.’s case far
better for the reading of it. And now, in view of the
hemorrhoidal complication, and the great inflammatory
swamp surrounding and threatening the vagina and the
rectum and their continuations and cellular beds, I re
collected a passage in Dr. Grover Coe’s work on Concen
trated Organic Medicines, which was first brought to my
knowledge by my dear friend, Dr. Le Gay Brereton, of
Sydney, and which runs as follows :—
“ But the most remarkable influences of the Collinsonin
are observable in haemorrhoids and other diseases of the
rectum.
The most inveterate and chronic cases are
relieved, and frequently cured, by means of this remedy
alone. It should be given in large doses at first, say
five grains, and repeated every two hours, in severe
cases, until the system is brought under its influence
and the symptoms controlled, and then continued in
average doses, three or four times a day, until the dis
ease is eradicated. We have known it to act promptly
in suppressing hseniorrhage from the bowels, and in re
lieving those distressing pains characteristic of hemor
rhoidal affections. It is a valuable constitutional remedy
in many affections, and its persevering use seldom fails
to benefit the general health. It increases the appetite,
and promotes digestion and assimilation.”
And this acknowledgment of the great benefit I have
received from others, will lead appropriately to the
treatment which was adopted in this case.
Rest, as complete as possible, was a necessity for
nearly three years: the patient reclined upon an invalid
couch. As I said before, whenever rest was far infringed,
�56
CELLULITIS.
even by carriage exercise, fresh inflammations, swellings,
and sloughs, were the result in a few days or hours.
Miss S. did indeed usually sit up to her meals, but it
was at the cost of considerable suffering. Dr. Pattison
insisted upon entire repose ; and I prescribed a little
movement, that she might not lose the use of her limbs,
and the functional activity which the limbs excite: and
between us both she oscillated as well as she could.
From a very early period it was found that all shocks
of every description did mischief. Some stimulating
drops (Liq. Amm. Fortiss., tfc.) applied to the spine to
provoke counter-irritation, caused Tetanic spasms, and
prolonged alarming faintings; and loss of voice was
always left behind, besides generally increased stiffness
of some part of the body, or the limbs. The tissues
were evidently so sympathetic, so poorly innervated, and
so friable, that any tension sprained and broke them, and
left a rapid nervous inflammation to consume the injured
parts. We soon discovered that letting the patient alone
was indispensable to her safety.
It was easy to look back through the leechings, and
blisterings, and bleedings, and to know the woeful part
they had played in breaking the bruised reed. It was
also at last obvious to conclude, that the various doctors
had treated special organs, without recognizing the
general cellulitis, which, as a disease, and as a tendency,
lay at the basis of all the exacerbations of the case. It was
not, however, easy to devise anything more for this
hyper-sensitive patient than juclicious expectancy,—
leaving her alone, with occasional reserves of general
common sense. Opiates and hot fomentations when the
pain was unbearable; injections and Castor Oil when the
bowels needed it (and it was never expedient to allow
anything approaching to constipation); wine, and stimulants, and good living,—these were necessities which
enabled her to endure and to live. What more ?
�CELLULITIS.
57
When I saw her first she had tried Allopathy and
Homoeopathy, each for many years; and had traversed
several great belts of illness, and between them had
passed through periods of comparative health. We
might, therefore, hope, especially after the critical age
was past, that the disease would wear itself out again,
and a respite of years be given. I therefore did my best
to combat one distressing complication after another, as
it arose; and she also had courses of Sulphur, Calcarea,
Silicea, Hepar Sulphuris, and the other profound medi
cines which in so many cases work good by apply
ing themselves to the foundations of constitutional
disease. Aconite, Bryonia, Belladonna, Lachesis, Arseni
cum, Arnica, Granatum, Hydrastis, and numerous other
medicines in all dilutions low and high, were adminis
tered as they seemed to be called for. Veratrum Viride,
also, from an early period of my treatment, according
to Dr. Maclimont’s suggestion (but long before I read
his Essay), had been given internally, to combat the
successive inflammations; and all this, with more or less
good effect, but with no comprehensive curative result.
In short, after using all the means I knew, I had miti
gated my patient’s sufferings, and relieved her symptoms
one by one; but the attacks of the complaint were in
creasing, and the deep disease itself derided my efforts.
It was now that I found and tried the Collinsonia
Canadensis, a remedy to which I was led entirely by the
disease of the rectum, vagina, and the expanse of
tissues in which these organisms lie. For the erethism,
spasms, violent cough, and sleeplessness, which accom
panied the progress of destruction, I found Hyoscyamus
in narcotic doses very useful; I had frequently employed
it before under similar emergencies. Now, then, she
took these two remedies, the Hyoscyamus at night, and
the Collinsonia n. 3 at intervals during the twenty-four
hours. As soon as ever she began the Collinsonia, to
�58
CELLULITIS.
use her own phrase, it “ acted in a most marked manner
upon the skin and muscles. During all her previous
illnesses, she had never had any perspiration; but now
the drops were continually standing on her forehead.”
By June, 1863, her size was greatly diminished; the
bulging tracts of hip, and loin, and hypochondrium were
subsiding towards the natural level; and, marvellous to
say, the foeces occasionally made no passage through the
recto-vaginal ulceration.
Continuing the Collinsonia
daily, she was able to walk about without being injured
by exercise. Improvement continued till the 9th of
August, when a cab-drive shook her, and brought on
internal suffering; great swelling of the left side took
place, and the old tracts of cellular and other tissues
were charged with the contents of inflammation. There
was difficulty of passing water, and the urine was scant
and high-coloured. Her spirits were depressed.
August 28th.—I recommended her for the first time
hot slipper-baths, medicated with Veratrum, Viride; and
almost at once immense relief was experienced. To use
her own words, “ the muscles of the right leg were soon
set at liberty; and for the first time for three years she
could really put her heel to the ground, and in a little
time walk without a stick.” The swelling subsided. The
action of the bowels became regular and complete. The
ulceration between the bowel and the vagina closed of its own
accord; and has given no trouble since. This result has,
I confess, surprised me; and I must doubt whether there
are many more happy issues in the history of ordinary
medicine.
September 30th.—She could “walk a mile without
her stick, with great enjoyment.”
October 1st.—The general health is good, and the
step elastic; though she still suffers much at night.
She has entirely given up her couch in the day, and is
able to employ her time thoroughly. She still continues
�CELLULITIS.
59
the Veratrum Viride baths twice a week, and the
Collinsonia persistently.
It is not long since I received from her the following
letter, which continues her state, and shows her thank
fulness :—
“ March 20th, 1864.
“My dear Doctor,
“ I have had no return of internal ailments for the last
three months, only symptoms of what I have suffered in
the continual passing of what appears to be the cores of
the abscesses. Since the large swelling subsided in my
side and body from the use of your medicated bath, I
have had my throat, glands, and left elbow much
swollen, but I am thankful to say the Feratfrwm Viride
has dispersed the ailments. For some weeks during the
severe winter my knees have been very stiff and painful
from rheumatism. You have relieved them entirely by
Collinsonia; the effect of this is very peculiar, for
whilst I am taking it the pain goes from the affected
part; but gives a comfortable glowing sensation at the
roots of the hair, which gets quite crisp. I have at this
present time no aches, no pains. I walked nearly five
miles yesterday, and have been twice to church to-day;
and the joy and gratitude I feel I cannot describe. In
stead of sleepless painful nights, I enjoy calm refreshing
sleep, and rise in the morning ready for any work or
walk that comes before me—(‘Bless the Lord 0 my
soul, and forget not all His benefits.’) That our good
God may bless your skill and watchfulness to many
others, whose lives have been despaired of, is the prayer
of your ever grateful patient,
“E------ S--------.
“4, St. Leonard’s Terrace, Maida Hill, West.”
The last time I saw her medically was on March 30th,
when she was suffering from indigestion, and deficient
�60
CELLULITIS.
action of the liver. These symptoms were speedily re
lieved by Pulsatilla n. 12.
On that occasion she reported some circumstances
which were interesting, as connected with a drug so
little known as the Collinsonia Canadensis.
She re
ported that she had left off the Collinsonia for some
little time; and that since leaving it off, her “ hair felt
so limp as if she could do nothing with it.” She also
felt an achy coldness about the head, whereas before she
felt “ a comfortable glow enlivening at the roots of the
hair; the hair was also crisp, curly, and growing;” and
under the same medicinal influence the hair from grey
has been becoming black. While taking the Collinsonia
Canadensis she “ feels as if all the muscles have more
vigour; a lightness of body, as if she is fit for any
thing.”
After the Pulsatilla was finished, I prescribed the con
tinuation of Collinsonia, 30 and 12. Now, these high
dilutions of the medicine have a most penetrating effect,
extending their power over the whole organism. If any
one doubts it, let him doubt after a fair trial, and then I
will love his doubt.
This lady is now well: thank God. Three serious
questions occur:—1. Seeing that she has had intervals
of health before, will she now remain well ? Can she be
said to be cured ? I believe she will remain well, and
that she is cured, because the result, for the first time in
the history of her cases, is due to specific treatment,
which has been discovered for her particular case; and
also to general treatment answering to specific.
If
the complaint recurs, Veratrum Viride and Collinsonia
Canadensis may fairly be expected to extinguish it
at once. 2. How do I know that the Collinsonia
was the specific, and did the work ? Reader, did
you ever shoot a bird, and know at once you had shot
it, without having any ground for the knowledge
�CELLULITIS.
61
but its own intrinsic assurance ? The evidence was
irresistible, but can hardly be conveyed. The other
drugs I had tried struggled with the disease, and
succumbed to it: the disease crouched from the first
moment before this one, and melted into nothingness.
The whole life was altered: there was a consciousness of
health coming from afar, but surely coming—the advanced
pickets of it were already on the spot in the very first
dose of the Collinsonia.
But the Cellulitis returned after the cab-shaking of the
9th of August. Yes: and it may return again, in its begin
ning, under any imprudence, until the organism forgets the
habit of it. But there was one reason then, which there
will not be again: the tissues, infarcted and confarcted
for years, were loaded with effete materials, and the
Collinsonia, after having slain the present monster, found
before it an unliftable load of his former exuviae and
slough-skins. These could still be a seed of mischief,
and a multiform root of destructions.
The Veratrum
Viride was needed to disperse them, which it did by
aggrandizing sweats to the uttermost; by increasing the
power of the absorbents enormously; and by thus dimi
nishing the bulk and packing around old “cores,” it
allowed them to seek an outlet, and to drop from the
organization. It also destroyed the capacity for inflam
mation in the tissues, and rendered them incombustible
—as the whole course of these pages has shown that this
drug does. 3. Is the Collinsonia a specific for Cellulitis
in other cases? This question can only be answered
after an extended experience. I was led to it by its
patness to the attack on the rectum and to the haemor
rhoids ; and in cases similarly complicated, I should have
great confidence in its specific powers. But then, on
the other hand, these symptoms were of such late deve
lopment, that they seem to form no part of the ground
work of the disease; and therefore it may be, that the
�62
ERUPTIVE FEVER.
Collinsonia is really the remedy for many forms of
Cellulitis. The sceptical part of us will again suggest
that the Veratrum Viride was equally a specific in this
instance. I do not, however, see anything in its known
action, hitherto, to account for its cure of the recto
vaginal fissure, which was nearly obliterated before the
Veratrum Viride baths were employed.
XX.
Eruptive Fever, with threatened Paralysis of the Brain.
On the 1st of this May, I was called to see Miss R.,
a young lady from the Midland Counties, on a visit in
my neighbourhood, and found her with a flushed and
spotted face, and complaining of some pain in the back,
for which symptoms I prescribed Bryonia and Mer
curius.
May 2, at seven in the morning, an urgent message
summoned me to her at once. She had alarmed her
sister and the family by several fainting fits during the
night. When I arrived, she was labouring under strong
excitement, apparently hysterical. Her face was red
and swollen with a continuous eruption; and small
pimples, which created no great irritation, were thickly
dotted over the chest. The pain in the small of the
back was worse. I ordered her to continue the Bryonia
and Mercurius, and to have Ignatia occasionally if the
faintings returned.
At 30 p.m. I saw her again, and found her symptoms
*
aggravated. Her pulse was fluttering, and 110. Occa
sionally she lost her voice; at other times she could not
speak plain, so as to be understood. Her manner was
hurried and excitable, and I could not command her
silence. She complained of an electric feeling in the
limbs. The pain had left her back, and the face was less
�ERUPTIVE FEVER.
63
swelled; but the eruption extended now all over the
body, and was not unlike measles in appearance. She
had considerable cough. I prescribed Rhus and Phos
phorus, and Veratrum Viride lotions to the forehead.
For support—chicken-broth, mutton-broth, brandy, and
wine-and-water.
May 3rd, 11.10 a.m.—I was unable to see her last even
ing, having a call into the country. Now, when I paid
my visit, I found she had been alarmingly ill all night.
Pulse 100, very weak—nay, almost gone. The eruption
on the face was raised and scarlet. She had low, mutter
ing delirium. The prostration was utter, and her hands
and arms fell about as if completely paralysed. Cough
bad, and sore throat superadded. She had had no sleep.
Occasionally she could be roused to temporary conscious
ness, and then she said she was better. Her friend who was
with her was anxious to have Father A. in the house, to
administer the last sacraments, and I could not say that
such a measure might not be urgent, for, indeed, she seemed
to be dying. I prescribed Belladonna, Stramonium, and
ffisemewn, in alternation, at half-hour intervals; and
ordered a cap of Veratrum Viride lotion, covered in with
gutta percha tissue, and kept tightly on the head, to the
whole brain: the hair to be shortened sufficiently to
admit of its close application.
At 3^ p.m., I found her revived and sensible, though
she still spoke with morbid velocity, and would not hold
her tongue. The head, however, was decidedly relieved;
pulse 100. I found that the Veratrum Viride cloths had
not been applied, but the remaining hair had been wetted
with it, and gutta percha tissue superposed; now, however,
I had the cloths carefully applied. The extreme collapse
was lessened; she was sick and had some epigastric pain;
the tongue furred, but not fleshy. She had taken sherryand-water and beef-tea, frequently. To continue the
medicines at the same intervals. To the Veratrum Viride
�64
ERUPTIVE FEVER.
brain-lotions, I added some tincture of Keith’s Oil of
Capsicum—an invaluable local remedy, where stimulation
is required.
At 9 p.m. I found her more composed than she was by
the Report last night, but less so than she had been at my
last visit; pulse 102. Her answers were quite rational,but
the speech sometimes sharp and splintery. She had
passed no urine since 3 o’clock in the morning, but had
had one good motion. There was no prostration, but
constant sickness. The eyes were suffused, the skin hot,
but the palms moist. Continue the local and internal
medicines. Give Ipecacuanha occasionally, for sickness.
May 4th, 9^ a.m.—Pulse 96‘8. She is comparatively
calm and composed this morning, and the threatened
paralysis of the brain has passed. Her pose in bed is
good, and she can use her arms. The sickness left her
at half-past eleven last night. Her tongue is now clear
ing. The eruption is continuously red on the face, and
smooth there; but dotted, perseminated, and raised all over
the body, and even on the fingers. It is not, how
ever, very thick. The urine is now normal; and the
cough better; but the sputa are thick and suspiciouslooking, and sink in water. Her talkativeness is still
controlled with difficulty. She had small snatches of
sleep in the night, with talking in it; and two sleeps of
half-an-hour each. She feels the tingling of the Cap
sicum over her head and neck. Continue all the means;
the internal medicines, however, at longer intervals.
4 p.m.—Pulse 96. Copious tubercular-looking sputa.
Rale in right chest. Quite collected, and can sit up in
bed.
9.20 p.m.—Pulse 88. No hurry of manner. Continue
the medicines, but omit Veratrum Viride cap for a few
hours.
May 5th.—Pulse 72. Eruption lessening; calmer and
stronger. She had two hours’ good sleep in the night,
�ERUPTIVE FEVER.
65'
and many dreamy dozes. The expectoration is less.
Dulcamara and Calcarea Carbonica. To have some
under-done minced mutton-chop.
May 6th.—Pulse 80. The rash is still on the face;
sleep poor; cough and expectoration less; tongue, clean
ing. She felt better after her chop yestesday. She is
to take Cod Liver Oil, and continue the medicines, but
not the lotion.
May 7th.—A poor night, in consequence of swelled
face and abscess in the gums. Pulse 80. Continue.
May 8th.—Pulse 75. Seven hours’ sleep; occasional
hysterical laughing, which she does not remember after
wards. The suspicious expectoration gone, and replaced
by clear salivary spitting. She has a good appetite,
and was up for an hour last evening. This morning
she is writing notes, which I forbid; and has on her bed
Father Newman’s Apologia pro Vita Sud, which she is
not to read. The eruption is still out on the face, but is
leaving the body; the tongue is healthily clean. Con
tinue Dulcamara and Calcarea Carbonica and Cod Liver
Oil.
May 9th.—The face peeling; pulse 72. A night’s
rest; functions regular; no cough or expectoration.
Continue.
May 11th.—Convalescent.
What part did Hysteria play in this case ? At first,
although there was an eruptive fever, I was inclined to
set down the nervous symptoms as purely hysterical. But
the attack on the brain, threatening paralysis, was too
alarming to be treated on that hypothesis alone. And
the anti-congestive Veratrum Viride., with the medicines,
produced instantaneous relief. Moreover, the subsequent
attack on the chest showed a travelling materies morbi of
a real bodily character. The fever was of that kind
which is sometimes called spurious scarlatina, and for
which Dulcamara is homoeopathic: during the progress
5
�66
of which, paralysis of the brain, or of the lungs, is some
times imminent.
And here I conclude these cases for the present, feeling
assured that the truly experimental reader will find in
them indications for a new and easy power of healing in
numerous diseases that have hitherto been fatal to kings
*
and poor people alike—from defect of the direct and
efficient ways and remedies which I now make known.
* Witness the deaths of the kings of Denmark and Wurtemberg,
from erysipelas, within these few months. I believe they might have
been alive now, and an iniquitous war have been postponed by a few
ounces of Veratrum Viride.
�Medical Freedom.
It is my intention from time to time to offer cases with
remarks, as an easy means of bringing new treatment
and occasional thoughts before the public.
The time is to come when general medical education
will surround my profession so closely, that its narrow
ness and exclusiveness, and its cliques, will give way
under the pressure of the public common sense; and no
authority will be left but the authority of facts. I
have a great hope in me to hasten that desirable time.
For it is evident that the simpler medical truth can
become—by medical truth understand truth in practice,
the only test of which is, success in practice—the more
enlightened public criticism must come upon the doctors,
and give them their degrees in every separate case. A
man’s or a woman’s repute will be his or her sole
authorization to practice. For instance, in the treat
ment of small-pox as I have now made it public, any
mother or grandmother may demand the remedies which
ensure the benefits recorded in the foregoing pages; and
if the doctor is not acquainted with them, and will not
employ them when pointed out, then such mother or
grandmother can take away his diploma in the case,
and either confer it upon herself, or provisionally upon
any other person whom she may appoint to conduct the
precious interests of the family health. There can be
no wise authority beyond her, or above her.
For competition will be the soul of success here, as it
*
5
�68
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
is in every other case. Given any field of nature or
experience to be explored, and all the faculties of man
are wanted for it; all the chances of birth are wanted
for it; all the gifts of God are wanted for it; all the
developments of time are wanted for it; all the freedom
of society is wanted for it; all absence of fear of man,
and fear for position, is wanted for it; all good genius
and good ambition is wanted for it; in short, numberless
men are wanted, each mind of them free, and original,
and inspired, as if there was nobody else in the world;
yet each instructed in his lower walks by the labours of
the rest; and all animated by a common faith in the
inevitable co-operation of good with good, and the ine
vitable consentaneousness of knowledge with knowledge,
though independence and freedom be the only law and
bond for each.
Free societies, free institutions will necessarily arise
out of this new medical humanity: order most punctilious
and most exacting will arise; but freedom will be the
king upon its throne.
But now we see the reverse of this, and health con
tracted and eclipsed in the prisons of medical establish
ment.
The maintenance of this present condition lies in the
Protection of Physic by the State. Continue this, and
an external and well-nigh irresistible aid is afforded to
the existing general condition of medical art and science,
as against anything which would considerably enlarge it;
still more, which would revolutionize it ever so benignly;
and, most of all, against anything which tends even
remotely to de-professionalize it, publicize it, and human
ize it. Continue this, and an art and science which depend
upon the natural truths of God, the capacities of nature,
and the genius of mankind, and which should be nourished
most intimately of all on the One Exemplar of Revelation,
and the fact of Redemption—that art and science are
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
69
commanded to eat the dry crusts of Parliament, instead
of the manna of Heaven, and the bread of the earth;
and lawyers and the magistracy stand with a ferule of
penalties to rap the knuckles and break the exploring
fingers of discoverers who dare to discover out of accord
with colleges, or who dare to discover at all if they are
not cloister-vowed, and cloister-bred. Out upon such
public insanity. Any other art, similarly narrowed,
would be similarly strangled. Engineering or chemistry,
in their existing condition in April, 1864, protected—or
what is the same thing—arrested by the State, would
stiffen into Chinese imitation, and their soul, which is
invention, would be lost; their worldly motive, which is
ambition, unbounded by other men’s power, would be
lost; and their huge sense of freedom, in which they
live and move and have their being, would be exchanged
for the degrading consciousness of the powdered head
and well-fitted livery of the State.
But medicine must be emancipated, and as the public,
directed by God, will have to do the work, I address my
medical life and thought to the public; and not specially
to the people in bonds.
Yet would I willingly calm the apprehensions of all
professional brethren.
1. Not a college, sect, or diploma will perish when
physic is free from State patronage and protection; that
is to say, unless public bodies choose to disband them
selves. The only power they will lose will be the power
of harming other bodies, or other people not of their way
of thinking. They will gain the power of emulating in
good works and open-mindedness all the useful people
whom they have called quacks, and imposters, and un
qualified practitioners, and who have been the moving
wheels of practice in all ages of the world. They will
gain the humanity of learning from the dog, when he
cures himself 'with grass, without practising the now
�70
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
ordinary ingratitude and inhumanity of kicking the dog
that is their teacher. They wiR sympathizingly learn
from the North American Indian, and the poor Hindoo,
the traditional healing virtues they have known since the
earliest ages; and their own old pharmacopeias will be
enriched, not then without acknowledgment, with the
sweet beginnings of simplicity, of nature, and of health.
Nay, the certainty is, that the existing colleges, owing
to the decrepitude of the public mind, always induced
by being protected, will be too enduring.
2. In the new time coming, when Parliament will no
longer prescribe a medical profession, and force the
British people to take the dose, the public will be more
apt than they are now to send for regular and collegesanctioned practitioners; provided the colleges give
themselves no airs, but compete fairly in the medical
race. For the colleges have the start, and can enter
the course with many chances of success; provided,
again, they can take to their hearts the new fact of
freedom, and love it as they ought.
At all events we may say it will be their own fault if
they are not the chief ministers at the public bedside.
This, however, will again depend upon the progress of
the art of healing; and institutionally upon other col
leges quite diverse from themselves coming upon the
scene, to enrich medicine, enflame competition and emu
lation, and extend the boundaries of that large kind
feeling which alone can melt away professional jealousy,
and which is the only climate in which all that is liberal
and humane can live.
But would I commit the lives of the community to the
possible intervention of uneducated men?
That, I
answer, is the very thing which has taken place at
present, and which I would invoke freedom to help me
to avoid. The education of the schools cannot fit men
for curing the diseases of their fellows; it is only one way
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
71
of launching them towards professional, but not neces
sarily, healing life. A man of no Latin, no anatomy,
no physiology, is every now and then a good physician,
though he sit on the lowest forms of society. He is
educated for that use, though he cannot write his own
name. By freedom, bring him into rapport with the
light of learning, if you can ■ but at all events kill not
the Divine power which is in him of doing good, because
he is not educated up to your bench. Perhaps you are
confounding education, which is the accepted art of
making gentlemen, with that grander education, or leading
forth, which every man can have, and which consists in
giving him freedom and a career, that his original gifts
may be led forth by their own way, and his own way,
into each one’s promised land of a useful and associated
life. To confound these two educations were a mistake;
for the great physician, look you, may come in a beggar’s
guise. There are no uneducated men save the men that
cannot do their life-work. Their success in that gives
them their diploma of knowledge every day. And no
college can take it away from them. And none ought
to have the power of obscuring it, by insisting that it
shall be pasted over with an artificial document of State
paper.
Want of skill and want of care in medical practice
amount to so much unjustified death per annum; but
who supposes that state protection of physic can increase
the amount of skill in the medical community? The
State, it is true, can exact from everyone, that he or she
shall pass through a curriculum of preparatory studies
and hospital attendance, to fit him to enter upon practice.
But of the studies, many may be useless, except as ac
complishments. From the studies, many useful ones
may be left out, owing to the bigotry of the elders
The diploma may be sought as the shield of protection
to the doctor rather than as the shield of health to the
�72
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
patient. Numerous men naturally qualified for medicine,
born doctors, may be, and are, shut out from their life
work, by the expense which confines the practice of
physic to the abler classes. All the State licentiates
leaning upon their diplomas, are apt from the very se
curity of their position to be mastered by a conceit in
which natural skill must languish. To be built up
against freedom, to be privileged, is to be built up
against nature; and gifts of God, which in this case are
given first in the heart, will be small where the receivers
of them deny the exercise of them to their fellows. To
be inhumane to your brother man, to be chartered
against him, is a bad preparation for ministering to the
sick, or the departing. The root and basis of medicine
is the love of healing in the universal heart and mind;
the stem of it is the instinctive perception and light
which is born to penetrate into health and disease; the
branches, and the twigs and the leaves of it are the
specialities of perceptions from the nature and the spirit
of mankind; which become special in the course of ex
perience ; the love of healing reigning and animating in
every one of them. Mere experience in its -widest
range is the soil the tree grows in, and the climate in
which it lives. You may garden, you may deepen, you
may purify and enrich this experience as you like; but
the tree grows through all the world, and sciences, and
societies, and states have nothing to do but first not to
define it, not to hinder it; and second, to help it if they
can. If it wants pruning, the force of public opinion
and public criticism, and the pressure of public safety,
are the only instruments that can lop its sacred life; and
all these will play an immeasurably greater part when
State patronage has passed away.
And now suppose you had broken your leg, and it was
badly managed by a regular doctor, a surgeon by Act of
Parliament; and that I had broken my leg, and it was
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
73
badly set by an unlicensed bonesetter; would not your
bad man, in an action at law, be far more Ekely to escape
from you scot free than my bad man? You know he
would; because he would be in the fortress of legafity in
the first place; and because he belongs to a powerful
clique which will gather round his incapacity, and stand
up and speak for him; and unless it be a very gross case,
say they could have done no better, and that his ante
cedents are perfect. The pressure of public safety towards
each individual is therefore greatly diminished by
officializing a medical profession; thus causing them all,
army-wise, to support each other, and giving them official
irresponsibility towards the suffering and the sick. And
if you could take away bonesetters and quacks altogether,
the medical profession would be utterly uncriticised and
unamenable. We may sum up this branch of the subject
with the axiom, that the more medicine is under the
protection of the State, the less can its practice be subject
to public opinion, or be under the correction of the law.
An impression has been sedulously cultivated, that
anatomy and physiology, pathology, and various other
branches of science, are the healing virtue in the world,
and that they, and written Practice of Medicine, con
stitute positive faculties in man; whereas they are mere
books, or at the best outlying experiences. Not one of
them has any direct relation, any rule of thumb, to a single
case that will hereafter occur. In every instance they
require to pass through a Eving medical perception to
be of any use. That perception, and aU that belongs
to it, is, as I have said before, a spiritual thing, and
must only be fed, but not substituted or overlaid, by
knowledge.
It is an appecite for doing good and
working cures, and experience and knowledge must
feed it; and this must take place upon true social con
ditions : that is to say, all the men who belong natu
rally to the caUing, must be encouraged, by the
�74
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
absence of State interference, to take their places at the
Board of Healing.
_ •
For, mark you, all science and experience depend for
their cultivation upon numbers of the right men: so many
earnest men to the square miles of medical truth, and
you will have greater crops of knowledge than if only
half the number were employed. And if you take away
protection from this medical corn of humanity, you will
have more colleges to grow it; waste lands of many
minds never cultivated before, sown with it; more
sciences, more extensive anatomy, physiology, pathology,
pharmacy, rising up from the new interest and curiosity
of the enfranchised medical masses; a greater closeness
of these sciences to the matter in hand; and a quantity of
non-medical minds, who have been forced by mere birth,
parentage, and genteel education, against their grain, into
the cultivation of healing, will be unable to stand the
natural rivalry of born doctors of all classes, and will
betake themselves to other callings. In the meantime,
there will not be more medical men, unless society
requires them, but there will be a constant tendency ever
increasing, that there shall be none but truly medical
men associated with the medical wants of the people.
This flush and influx of spirit and nature into the call
ing, will greatly—nay, incalculably—alter the spirituality
and naturalness of the art and its ancillary sciences.
Much will then be able to be done by genius and instinct,
which is now only vainly attempted by the cruel senility
of an effete profession. For the matter stands thus:—
Nature and its sciences must be cultivated, according to
the present exigency and mission of the human mind,
for these are the natural and scientific ages. Medicine
must be extended, falsely or benignly, from the pressure
of the sick upon the sound. The world of work revolv
ing with giddy velocity, brain and heart, and man and
woman, call aloud for central power to enable us to stand
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
75
upright in the rapid revolutions. If the medical faculty
—I mean the cohort of healers out of all men—is only
one-tenth nature’s strength, and nine-tenths noodledom
from one class only, the one-tenth must cast about
savagely, and most artificially, for the missing ninetenths of their natural mind and their natural array.
Failing to combat disease on such unequal terms, they
must endeavour to generate power, which is another
name for inspiration, instinct, and genius, out of mere
sciences; and these very sciences perpetually disappoint
ing them they must necessarily cudgel until there is
nothing left but analysis and detail. Woe then to the
bedside when knowledge itself is dust and ashes; and
woe to nature and her feelings when the rack and the
thumbscrew are applied as the only known means of
eliciting her loving, and on any terms but love’s, impenetrable secrets.
All this has gone on in our time and for ages past, but
now to clear understanding. If the medical calling had
been true to nature, and to human nature, in which
freedom and the order that springs from freedom are
abiding facts, the monstrosity of vivisection, of cutting
up live animals, never could have been thought to be a
means to the healing art. The great gorilla of cruelty
could never have been regarded as an ally of the Great
Physician. Perception, instinct, genius, the inspiration
of Christianity, which by making men love each other is the
heart and soul of all human arts, would have had it given to
them to heal diseases without the need of any suggestion
from a torture in which the demons must rejoice. It would
have been seen at once that to lay one knife edge upon a
living creature was to cut the supreme nerve that carries
the emotion of humanity right out from religion into the
medical mind. It would have been known instinctively
that the power of healing, coming as it should do from
Christ direct, is from that moment paralytic; that the
�76
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
steady will can no longer lift it, and that the good it still
does is in momentary spasms from the lower emotions of
the man. How different from the river of power, pro
ceeding down the Divine steeps, terrace by terrace, to
humanity at large, through faculties which are essentially
humane.
And this horrible vivisection is a type of the other
distorting arts and sciences which the false cramping of
medicine into a State-built profession is one active means
of producing. Chemic, static, and material reasoning
have as little to do with restoration of health as physio
logy founded upon the cutting up of living animals.
Observe, I do not deny that vivisection may, as other
analytic methods have done, contribute hints, in the ages
while man is still cruel to man, to practical medicine;
but I deny our right, even with chloroform to stupify
animals, to gain knowledge in this way. There are
robberies and murders in nature, and science has no
more right to live upon their spoils, than citizens have
right to retire into comfortable drawing-rooms for life
upon the proceeds of daggers and dark lanes. There are
better riches for man and science than these, and im
measurably better ways of acquiring them. Time was
when the cutting up of living criminals did contribute to
the progress of physiological knowledge. There is no
doubt of that; but even Dr. Brain-Skewerhard would
scarcely advocate the practice as legitimate at the present
day. And now the feelings of every one of his cats and
his crows is worth more than all the science which their
maltreatment has ever brought into his store.
Before quitting this branch of the subject, let us notice
that the State also lends a heavy pressure to discourage
the introduction of women as medical practitioners.
This it does by chartering irresponsible public bodies,
such as the colleges of physicians and surgeons, who deny
the right of examination to women, however gifted or
�MEDICAL FREEDOM,
77
accomplished they may be; and these brave women, few
at present in numbers, and with no public support, are
obliged to submit without appeal to this corporate
despotism which has grasped the keys of the door of
. medical practice. Surely here, as in all other human
things, the law is freedom and experiment. If woman
aspires to try her hand in healing the sick, what is the
justification of that power which would deny her the
trial ? You think she had better mind her own business,
and attend to her house and its concerns; but why then
do you not mind yours, and leave her to herself ? If she
has not tried the medical life, how is it possible to know
what will come of her trial? You cannot penetrate a
chemical, or a fact in anything, by thinking; you must
have experiment, which has made all the difference
between the dark ages of knowledge and the light ages.
Especially in human capacities you must have experi
ment ; and without freedom, which State patronage
inevitably destroys, you camiot have experiment. True,
woman may be altogether unfit for this work, but let her try,
which is the one only way to prove her unfitness. Do not
with your State sword of ungallantry cut her down in her
first exercises, because you think she ought not to succeed.
I do not know whether she will succeed or not, and that
is clearly no affair of mine; but I do know that if I deny
her the right to her experiment, besides being guilty of
the most cowardly meanness and unmanliness, I am
denying in the highest instance the divinely ordained and
only successful principle of all the arts and sciences—I am
crushing the very masterpiece of experiment.
In short, medical social science reposes on the ground
of medical social experiment, just as natural science re
poses upon the ground of natural experiment.
Instead then of cutting up living animals, favour by
freedom the putting together of living humanities;
favour in this way at once the highest synthesis and the
�78
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
highest experiment; and be assured that if no other good
comes from it, disburdened and leisure-gifted human
nature will become the vehicle of a spirit and a fire, of a
generosity and an insight, of a thankfulness and a pene
tration, of a love and of a life, before which Isis will let
drop her veil, and the artificial difficulties which have
barred and frozen out the long lost way to the positive
ages will be melted from before our advancing feet by
the smiles of nature herself.
But besides excluding without trial one half of the
human race, and perhaps the better half, from the
inspired pursuit of healing, State interference also con
fines the cultivation and practice of medicine virtually to
the middle classes. That is to say, it ordains that the
genius of the physician is only to be found in one rank
of society. It erects a property-qualification for exer
cising the gifts of God in the chief of the inspirational
arts supported by the chief of the sciences. Apply this
all round, and how absurd it grins upon us. Imagine
that Parliament should insist that no painter, sculptor,
poet, or musician should be born in the upper or the
lower ranks1 What a belief in caste, and Chinese arti
ficiality would this imply; and what an atheistic denial of
gifts, of genius, and of the mission of Nature’s noble
men, wherever they may be. And yet Parliament,
without intending it, virtually does all this for the
medical estate, by interfering to give privilege to colleges
of the middle class, which thenceforth inevitably pro
ceed by financial arrangements, and enforced studies, to
make a man first a gentleman in accomplishments, and
afterwards to let him be a medical man if his gifts lie
that way; and to dub him so in any case. This, too, is
against social experiment, and affronts nature in her
scientific regard.
It is the great source of quacks
among the poorer classes; the said quacks being evi
dently persons with some gift for medicine, but with no
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
79
means of an education. Emancipate medicine from
State-trammels, and poor men’s medical colleges would
arise, and compete not ignobly with the other colleges.
The poor could then be attended by educated people
of their own sort, at small expense, and the masses
generally would be raised by having their own un
scorned natural professions, and a new class of bluff
honest common senses and artisan ways of natural life
and thought would be added to these noble arts. The
medical instinct and inspiration of humanity shall stand
upon their feet in the masses.
Nor, then, would medical nature be cashiered, as she
now is, of the splendid culture and chivalric honour and
insight of the upper men and women. What Lord
Napier was to logarithms; what Lord Rosse is to astro
nomical experiments; what the Duke of Sutherland is to
rescue from fire; what Wellington was to war; and Prince
Albert to the republicanism of the arts and sciences,
that might other lords and ladies be to practical medicine,
and the inventions which it so much needs. But make
it essentially a middle class affair, and the lower classes
cannot bring their gifts into it, and the upper classes
will not. Yet it is against all reason to suppose that
the noblemen and gentlemen of Great Britain do not
include a per-centage of medically gifted men; and also
that the same is not true of the people. The fact that
as a rule they yield no recruits to the divine mission of
curing disease, is of itself sufficient to show that some
devouring artificiality is preying upon them; and that a
huge injustice is done to gifts for which we are heavily
responsible before God, and to our fellow men. The
protection of medicine by the State is that artificiality
and that injustice. Remove it, and with it you begin to
remove the baneful belief—now all but universal—
that medical men can be created by culture; that real
culture can come from without, and that the nature and
�80
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
gifts of the men are of second-rate importance. Nay,
in the very act of removing it you reverse that creed,
and make the gifts primary, and set the culture in the
second place. Will you have less culture for that ?
Oh! no, infinitely more! The gifts will become then so
sacred, and the responsibility of them so exacting, that
the sharp and genial powers will raise colleges before
which the existing ones could pass no examination, but
■ great and corporate though they be, would inevitably be
plucked. Where there is a will there is a way. And
the great way is natural knowledge; but the will in its
purest manifestation is only another name for the de
termination of our gifts.
And now, to turn the tables, having shown the
blighting and vitiating influence of State patronage
upon medicine, there is another branch of despotism
quite of an internal kind, which deserves to be recorded
and protested against. There is the attempt to subject
medicine, not to State law, but to scientific law; the
aim, as the phrase goes, to make it into a positive
science.
The truth is, as I have stated before, that
medicine is not a science at all, although nourished and
fed perhaps out of all sciences; Medicine is an Art, and
an art reposes upon a gift of God, and according to the
intensity of that gift it is called genius, and according
to its native and willing openness to the power above it,
it becames inspiration.
And that art summons and
employs all the faculties for its furtherance; among
them, all the scientific faculties, and seeks instruction
and advancement from them all. But because it is an
unquestioning rush of instinctive life from the man into
his world and his calling, it cannot be dominated by
any rule or principle whatever less than the love of
medical good, and subordinately and as a means the love
of medical truth. The doctrine or rule must ever be
allowed to invade that centre, any more than the geo
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
81
graphy of the earth must be palmed upon the sun. If
you attempt to work it by rule, some one ambitious
principle will extinguish all the much needed others,
and you will have war first, and then inconceivable nar
rowness in your mind. You will fall into sects, and at
the entrance to each Mrs. Grundy will stand doorkeeper
in your soul. You will not venture to prescribe what
you know would do good, because it is not of your self
chosen rubric; and because your fellows will call you to
account for a breach of your bond. You will cease to
look all round for means, and will wear the blinkers of
so-called principle where the precipices of your own and
your neighbour’s danger demand the foot of the chamois,
and the eye of the eagle. Heaven help you, you will
be accoutred for blindman’s buff when you ought to be
king of the terrible Alps. And all for what ? that you
may pretend to an exactness which nature disowns; and
may enthrone the tiny frame of material science upon
the colossal ruins not only of art, but of faith.
It cannot be done; there are no positive sciences
but those of man’s own making—the houses which he
has built, and in which therefore he can be supreme—
the rest are all fluctuating, and so full of mystery before
and behind, so meant also for usefulness and not for
absoluteness, that careful and humble science may indeed
be a positive ship, made in excellent human docks, but
the great, and desiderated, and unattainable knowledge
is the sea itself, and God is in that sea. The bark rocks
and floats, and the further it voyages, and the more it
moves, the less likely is it to founder in the inscrutable
deep. Let it not want to become more positive than
speeding flight can make it; let it not attempt to drop
the anchor of conceit in the unfathomable places. Let
it not dare to say of any spot in the Divine ocean—This
is mine!
These matters may sound abstract, but they are of
6
�82
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
immense practical significance, and play an important
part, for good or for ill, at the bedside. For if you find
a practitioner who has a doctrine which he considers
absolute, and who derives his art from that doctrine, two
bad consequences will follow. In the first place, he will
set an overweening value upon the science, pure and
simple, of the case he is treating: the exacting doctrine
in him will have an unnatural appetite to be fed out of
that science; and the regard of the cure as an end will be
perpetually confused by the regard of the science as an
end. I have felt this so strongly myself in practice,
that I have been obliged to put it down: and to tear up
in my mind all magisterial doctrines and principles, and
to rewrite them on neutral and subservient parts of myself
in a humble and ministerial capacity.
By this means,
however, I hope I am attaining to a wider as well as
exacter science in the end: a science which radiates from
the conscious intellect of cures. But in the second place
the doctrinaire practitioner will be bound, or greatly
biassed,—by his own mind; by the surveillance of his doc
trinaire patients, whom he has helped to make into
pedants; and by the medical clique to which he belongs,—
not to do anything which outlies the doctrine which is
his creator.
Suggestions apart from that doctrine will
tend to reduce him to a chaos. What treble fear all this
implies ! What a slender exploration of the means of
nature!
What a regard to a centre of the fancy, when
sad and bleeding facts lie calling for pity, and ought to
avail to take one quite out of oneself, and to make one
gather succour from all things. Instead of this, the first
care is to practice within the doctrine, and to use no
weapon but what the armoury of the doctrine contains.
It is true you may have the highest confidence in the
doctrine, and may believe it is a universal rule, but the
universality is only a belief, and not an established fact;
and no number of human lives can make it more than a
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
83
belief; that is to say, a probable, and in the ratio of its
probability, a growing and a useful science.
Neverthe
less, you have no right to limit your powers of doing
medical good to such a belief or such a science. Observe,
it is not the science but its mastership that I impugn.
And I do impugn it, because it limits you with no com
pensation ; and because in a vast number of serious cases
it does not succeed; and because where it does succeed,
you have ever a duty to demand a greater success, in
greater rapidity and perfectness of cure. But here again,
your masterful doctrine tells you that when you have
served it faithfully you have done enough.
It will easily be seen that all this applies with force to
Homoeopathy, a doctrine to which I owe so much; in
which, so far as it goes, I thoroughly believe; and which,
whenever the supreme end of cure and my means of
knowledge allow, I unreservedly practice. I regard
Homoeopathy as the grandest natural and material feeder
which has yet been laid down by the genius of a man
from the nature of things into the spiritual body of the
healing arts. Yet Homoeopathy is but a doctrine, a
science, and a rule, and I will not derive medicine from
a science, or confound it with a science; on the contrary,
the science of Homoeopathy itself is a beautiful child and
derivation of an advancing medical art.
Let it occupy
a central, a solar place in the science of therapeutics by
drugs. There it can subsist. But no man can do good
by ignoring any of the wide realms which lie around it
and beneath it, and which are the domain of the collec
tive medical mind.
In the very matter of which the body of this little
work treats, the gist of the above abstract remarks is very
well exemplified. For I have been allowed to discover
that certain formidable diseases, small-pox to wit, can be
treated tuto^ cito et jucunde^ with a safety, rapidity, and
absence of suffering hitherto unknown, by simple external
�84
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
applications. In the first place, I had a powerful desire
to cure my patients well, and a dissatisfaction with the
present standard of well, in all schools.
This desire in
its measure is the natural heart of healing. Then, in the
next process, I knew that Hydrastis soothes irritated
mucous surfaces, and sometimes skin surfaces, and I
thought I would try it on the face of small-pox. The
only science here involved was an acquaintance with the
drug, and a little reasoning by analogy. I tried it, and
it succeeded marvellously.
And since then I have the
art of applying it correctly, increased by the experience
or knowledge of several cases. And I have faith and
confidence in its being a future blessing to the public; a
saving of innumerable healths, and faces, and lives.
But where is the positive science in all this ? A little
good knowledge suffices for a great deal of good practice.
It strikes me that I have been as little scientific as a
skilled blacksmith who makes a horse-shoe in a given
number of strokes. Of course he knows what he is
about with great accuracy; but that is all you can say
of his knowledge. The rest is educated instinct, and
excellent smithing. He may read about iron and heat,
and the biceps and triceps muscles of his arm, in over
hours ; and he will better his mind by it, and not hurt
his strong sinews ; but the science of his art must not
intrude itself book-wise into his forge, unless as fuel, or
he will soon be a bad professor and spoil horse’s hoofs.
Take the obverse, and suppose that I had enthroned
the Homoeopathic principle above my mind, and that I
had to grapple with dreadful small pox. The exigency
then becomes, to cure with a medicine which will produce
symptoms as nearly similar as possible to those of the
disease. I know no drug which will do this except
tartar emetic in one case which I have seen. I should
therefore have had to cast about through the whole of
Pharmacy for the drug in question; to reason by
�MEDICAL FREEDOM.
85
analogy from small symptoms to great ones, and per
haps I should have reasoned wrong; and after all I might
never have found what I wanted. And when I had
found it, I should have lacked precedent for applying it
externally. In the meantime, what patients unrelieved
and unsaved might be waiting at the doors of my posi
tive science before I could throw them open and invite
the sufferers into relief and into health! Perforce, I
must have hardened and narrowed and thus satisfied
my heart, to let such sad waiting go on. And at the
best, where would be the gain to science ? Science is
but the register of success ; and I should have had no
science of shortening the disease, no science of curing
the disease, no science of anything, but the worst sort
of expectancy ; the science of contentment with bad
things, and the science of waiting for science. In the
end, not Homoeopathy, but the small-pox would be my
king.
To obviate this I stood upright, as I have been
gradually for some years now endeavouring to do, and
regarded Homoeopathy, and all other means and pathies
whatever, as my appointed servants, and myself as the
servant of healing. And now I had no jealousies among
the servants, because I gave no privileges to any; and
I could pick and choose from all means, regardless of
the overweeningness of science, of the sectarianism of
patients, and of the despotism of medical cliques. In
short, I essayed to be free in my art; to wait upon
Heaven, and to use all ministers and faculties in their
degree of service. Feeling the blessed power of this
position, in contradistinction to the cramp and weakness
of my old one, I am in duty bound, even against the
charge of egotism, to impart it to my fellow men.
What then, it may be asked, becomes of Homoeopathy ?
I answer that it takes its place exactly according to its
proved services, and stands upon the irremoveable foun
�86
MEDICAL FREEDOM.
dation of its cures. It will be all that it ever was, the
most suggestive thing in the round of Pharmaceutical
science. Its dogmatism and its hugeness of minutise
will be cashiered, and Homoeopathy will be the stronger
for losing them. It will be girded afresh for a magni
ficent servitude to the ends of healing. Its martyrs will
still prove medicines on their own bodies, but with an
almost exclusive attention to cardinal results.
Its
registers of symptoms, curtailed by good sense, will be
mastered by those who court intimacy with drugs, and
studied continually afresh where the art of the physician
requires it. The only difference will be, that Homoeo
pathy will become enormously progressive, because it
will have no authority and no privilege, and will be
obliged to subsist upon cures. Reduced, so far as au
thority goes, to equality with other medical sciences, it
will become primarily ambitious of suggesting remedies,
and cease from provings which leave out the human
memory, and constitute a new matter and faculty of
absolute dust. But it will no more quarrel with other
means than the mariner’s compass quarrels with the
sextant, or the sails with the steam-engine of the ship.
Above all, mere instrument that it is, and mere instru
ment that all science is, it will never go mad again, and
believe that it is the captain of the medical crew; for
that captain is the Great Physician Himself, and all His
sons and daughters in the plenary freedom of His art.
�APPENDIX.
For some time past I have been in the habit of recommending
the Hungarian wines in the convalescence from fevers and
other diseases; and also in cases of vital debility, and its con
sequences. A large experience has now enabled me to endorse
afresh the commendation which I addressed to the importer,
Mr. Max Greger, *, Mincing Lane, and which is here ap
7
pended. The physician is often sorely tried to invent a new
nutrient-stimulant when the stomach is fastidious, and the
powers of life require recruiting, but are not to be reached by
ordinary bread, or ordinary wine. In such cases the novelty,
as well as the blood-invigorating qualities of the Hungarian
wines, render them rare friends at the bedside:—
June 27th, 1863.
Sir,—Since your wines were brought under my notice by
Colonel and Aiderman Wilson (Artillery Barracks, Finsbury),
I have had good opportunity of judging of their medical
qualities. My experience, especially of your Carlowitz wine,
is, that it agrees with persons who cannot take other wines;
that it has not the acidity which often renders the French and
Rhine wines inadmissible; that it is gratefully strong to weak
stomachs, and exerts a strengthening influence upon the blood.
Moreover, what is of great consequence medically, it is new to
the palate in flavour, and to the system in qualities. It is in
the best sense nutritious, and very valuable in that large class
of diseases and disorders which depend upon a feeble condition
and constitution of the blood. It is good in heemorrhages.
In an infant born with imperfectly closed heart, Carlowitz has
�88
APPENDIX.
sustained the strength admirably, while other means aiding
nature have been completing the organization.
Yours obediently,
Garth Wilkinson.
To Max Greger, Esq.
As a record and a protest I here reprint a Letter on Vivi
section, which I addressed to the Editor of the Morning Star,
and which appeared in that Paper on the 20th of August,
1863.
VIVISECTION.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE “ STAR.”
Sir,—From my heart, and also from my head, I thank, you
for your leading article on Vivisection in to-day’s paper.
Allow me, as a small response, to burden you with the office
of forwarding half-a-guinea as our annual subscription to the
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. I hope and
trust that through the subject of vivisection now publicly
opened, and the controversy going on, this society will become
affluent enough to have special correspondents and reporters
wherever vivisection is practised under medical sanction. If
the horror is to be, let us know it, and let us judge of it. If
science is to be born from the throes of animal life, lut us also
be duly horrified and agonised, and suffer with the sufferers.
I have long been of Sir Charles Bell’s opinion that vivi
section is a delusion as a means of scientific progress. Of
course its results, like any other set of facts, constitute a
science in themselves; so do the results of murder, and so do
the results of picking pockets; an exact science, if you like;
and the earlier parts of the science will of course be subject to
correction by the later : and thus vivisection may show, and
has shown, truths and errors in the special walk of vivisection.
The science of animal agonies, like all sciences, can be cor
�APPENDIX.
89
rected, eliminated, and completed by experiments of fresh and
ever-fresh agonies. Buf it has been a mistake to suppose that
we were in the path of the humane sciences —in natural phy
siology, natural symptomatology, or within millions of leagues
of medicine, when with rack and thumbscrew and all torture
we were the inquisitors of the secrets of animal life. Under
such circumstances nature is inevitably a liar, and an accom
plice of the Father of Lies. I know that her, and his, very
lies are a science; but then they are not the science we take
them for, nor the science we want. They are not mind-ex
panding, heart-softening, or health-conferring science.
Vivisectional anatomy has contributed to medicine—meaning
by medicine the healing of diseases—virtually nothing, but
“ false paths and wrong roads.” Morbid anatomy has con
tributed marvellously little. Anatomy has done far less than
is supposed, though it keeps the eyes of the physician’s
imagination open, and enables him to tally conditions and
symptoms somewhat with parts and organic structures. If
the internal parts of the human frame were a closed page to
morrow, so to remain for the next half-century, and if the
symptoms and results of disease, and what will mitigate and
cure them, were the only permissible field of experiment, the
art of healing would lose nothing by ceasing to hold intercourse
with the sciences of structure and function—at all events, for
a time.
For example, I assert that the whole science of tubercle is
trivial and valueless in its results upon the curing of con
sumption; and equally inefficient in showing the cause of
consumption; and that cod liver oil and general regime, which
have no logical or real connection with the morbid anatomy of
consumption, are the present important medical agencies for
the treatment of that condition. And I assert that the whole
science of the Yivisectional and morbid anatomy of diabetes ;
the artificial production of it by lesions of the nervous system ;
the conditions of it in the liver, the lungs, and the kidneys,
have nothing to do with its cure, and throw no light upon its
cause; and that the fact that in many instances it can be cured
by the Hydrastis Gamadensis, the Leptandria, and Myrica
cerifera, has never yet been pointed to by any scalpel; and is
likely to be resisted by the men of the scalpel later than by
many others. What has the grand experience that a certain
�90
APPENDIX.
herb or drug will cure a disease, to do with a knowledge of the
particular wreck that that disease has left in the organisation
after death ? Pathological anatomy, except in surgical cases,
never suggests cure.
Now then, sir, let us take stock in this great Assize of
Humanity and the Healing Art versus the Cutting up of Live
Animals. Let us have definite tabulated statements of the
discoveries and results of the gain to man which has accrued
from the introduction of vivisection.
The great facts, the
benign arts that have been drawn out of the intestine agonies
of animals can be easily stated in lines, and columns of lines,
if they exist. Let us have them. We have had vivisection
enough. Whole menageries have been kept here and in Paris,
and all over Europe, to have their brains sliced and their
bodies mangled. It has gone on for hours a day, and year
after year. What is the stock in hand of results to humanity,
to healing, or even to “ permissible ” science ?
For, good
doctors, there are sciences, and you will find it out, that are
not permissible. It would not be permissible to suspend a
man or a woman by a hook, to know ever so exactly how they
would writhe; no, not even if you were a painter.
And,
therefore, I use the word, “ permissible ” science. And I say,
that if you cannot show some mighty results, far greater than
the discovery of cod liver oil, and of the circulation of the
blood, your persistent vivisection leads only to abominable
sciences, and to the blackest of all the black arts—the in
dulging of the human heart; and the gutta serena of cruelty
after that will soon obliterate the intellectual eyesight of
medicine.—Your constant reader,
Garth Wilkinson.
August 19th.
P.S.—I am informed by Mr. Skelton, sen., since these pages
were written, that in 1863 he became a Licentiate of the
Apothecaries’ Company of London, and this year has taken his
degree in medicine both in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and is
“ registered ” accordingly.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
On the cure, arrest, and isolation of small pox of a new method: and on the local treatment of erysipelas, and all internal inflammations, with a special chapter on cellulitis and a postscript on medical freedom
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Wilkinson, Garth
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: xxiii, 90 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Leath and Ross
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G2484
Subject
The topic of the resource
Health
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (On the cure, arrest, and isolation of small pox of a new method: and on the local treatment of erysipelas, and all internal inflammations, with a special chapter on cellulitis and a postscript on medical freedom), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Inflammations
Medical Ethics
Sacerdotalism
Vivisection
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/993c8b08b527dae35812911023cabe8d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=qC1NC1jz-l8PL-xL-lfPMmQZydfc%7EX2lkf57t8kFRp6At2ntLbQpiiEadrK4ke4maFD4kb6Kk7QDcuuwJZJI8ZMej1zW3ZhfxjzAb4RmdQ0uMsmOdBuoAvVOhKixEMVaPpvFff7r7xcXUnp32FmQviKhsGmwrKGfU9BWA%7Ev6rWux-kGOmTQTtSD6Ry5S-lUTA2GD8cQR6uv5Jjawt9OGvCozHnmLnmhBQ0FU3F1r2pR5aE2Tt--sekpnXSSnvgs%7EoYJ7ziIUz9SZwYFdyvqrxjcMxhI4HVxcJPcJ5coY-ud9KPjJUIvvDWrQgS4GR1EatQ4MMd%7E%7EUaFpZdrmSsjRtA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e22416b9873228dff919f417aef4b1fa
PDF Text
Text
VOLUNTEER PHILANTHROPY.
A PABEB BEAD BEEOBE
THE SOCIAL SCIENCE CONGRESS,
HELD
IN THE CITY OE YORK,
DURING THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 1864. "’ k..
BY
EDMUND CRISP FISHER.
LONDON:
WILLIAM RIDGWAY, 169, PICCADILLY.
1864.
��MILITARY DISCIPLINE *
AND VOLUNTEER PHILANTHROPY.
Mr. President, Ladies, and Gentlemen :
It will be difficult to find two principles
more seemingly antagonistic than Military Disci
pline and V olunteer Philanthropy. The Discipline
necessary for the cohesion and effectiveness of
armies proceeds from set rules framed upon the
experience of long years: it is cold, impassive,
unimpulsive, non-eclectic, autocratic, tyrannical; it
robs man of his individuality, deprives him of free
will—and looking only at the end to be attained,
treats the soldier as a simple part of a great
machine, to be strained, forced, and overwrought,
if needs be, and cast aside when worn out or other
wise incapacitated. Reverse the position in all its
several particulars, and we have the most distant and
opposite end of a far-stretching diagonal,—Volunteer
Philanthropy. What the commander of an army
is in presence of the enemy, the physician and
surgeon are in the sick chamber. The same law
governs both their orders—the law of absolute,
perfect, unhesitating obedience. Combine the two,
clothe the medical professor in the garb and rank
of the soldier, and you have the domineering, auto
cratic Army Surgeon, whose word is law, and with
A 2
�4
whom suggestion even becomes interference, and
almost dictation.
To the mere theorist, the Medical Staff of Armies
would appear to be all that is necessary to insure
the greatest possible effectiveness of the soldier,
covering him, so to speak, with defensive armour
against disease and wounds, and enabling him, with
the minimum of danger to himself, to inflict the
utmost damage upon his antagonist. But the dis
cipline of his dual profession, or, to be exact, of
his military capacity, deprives the army-surgeon
in a great degree of those advantages accruing
from the discoveries of science which become imme
diately known, and are as immediately investigated
and adopted by members of the civil branch of his
profession. Every thing connected with armies is
precised in fixed regulations; “ it is written,” is
the answer to every proposal for change; the spirit
of inquiry is checked and nullified, and innovation
is studiously guarded against as imperiling routine
and subversive of discipline. On the battle-field,
or in hospital, in his twin capacity of physician
and surgeon, the army medical man has difficulties
to contend with unknown to the civil branch of his
profession. In action he is overworked, and his
aids are far too few ofttimes to render him even
necessary assistance; in hospital he is bound down
to his fixed code of regulations; newly-discovered
remedies are not furnished by the medical purveyor,
and radical change in treatment has first to receive
j
I
�5
the endorsement of his superior officer. Frequently
—shall I not say generally?—his operations are
in a new and unexplored field, where diseases
of novel type require lengthy research and investi
gation before the proper treatment is discovered;
or the same class of disease under different condi
tions of climate and contingent circumstances, pro
duces new phases in the patient’s symptoms. He
is, in fact, isolated from most of the advantages
which the great body of the profession enjoys, and
the sick and wounded in his charge—the chief
consideration, after all—are by so much less fortu
nate than the suffering in civil life.
It was the knowledge of these facts which led to
the appointment of the Sanitary Commission in the
British Army during the Crimean war, but it is
open to question whether such a Commission would
have been permitted to exist if Miss Florence
Nightingale and her co-labourers had not proved
conclusively that volunteer assistance need in no
way interfere with military discipline—the first
consideration among soldiers,—and that it could be
of real practical benefit to the medical branch of the
army, when their respective spheres of action were
properly defined. Addressing itself to the Medical
Staff alone, subordinating its every movement in
the field and hospital to the wishes and wants of
that Staff; culling its experience in every region;
bound down by no fixed rules or inflexible regula
tions, the Sanitary Commission might become a
�6
valuable supplementary power in the army, and an
unfailing- reliance of the army medical officer. Its
true arena is recommendatory, its researches are in
the first degree eclectic, and it brings the entire force
of the whole outside medical profession to bear upon
the health of the soldier. The Medical Staff cannot
but gain by advice tendered from so high and dis
interested a source, and it has no cause to fear for
its own authority, when the action of the Commis
sion is purely advisory and guardedly consonant
with the most rigid discipline. Military Discipline,
in fine, calls to its aid the Volunteer Philanthropy
of the entire nation, and Volunteer Philanthropy di
vests itself of all things savouring of dictation, and,
confining itself to suggestion, submits in its turn to
discipline.
All history and experience prove that Army Me
dical Staffs, no matter how thoroughly and exten
sively organized, are sadly deficient at critical
moments. The world is accustomed to look at the
French nation as the military Power, par excellence,
of Europe; everything appertaining to armies, to
the utmost efficiency of the soldier, is there reduced
to method and rule, until the art of war is so tho
roughly investigated, and its rules, as it were, so
completely averaged, that the art has become almost
an exact science. Yet with the experiences of the
battle-fields of Solferino and Magenta before us,
where the wounded lay for hours, yea, days, without
assistance, who will say that the best organized
�7
Medical Staff fulfils the requirements expected of
it ? Such Staffs are really designed for the ordinary
routine of military life, and, to some extent, for the
average amount of extra casualties entailed by
battle; but a more than ordinary sanguinary engage
ment and lengthy pursuit of the foe may upset the
best calculations, and render an otherwise effective
Staff utterly inefficient. It was the knowledge of
this fact, gained on the field of Solferino, which led
a citizen of Geneva to attempt the formation of an
Universal Sanitary Commission. With the grand
proposal of Monsieur Henri Dunant it is neither
my province nor purpose to deal; but whether he
succeed or fail in his enterprise, he will at all events
have drawn the attention of the Governments and
People of Europe to a subject of momentous interest,
earning for himself and his coadjutors the proud
title of benefactors of the soldier.
At an early period in the history of the civil war
in the United States, the citizens of the North recog
nized the necessity of supplementing- the Army
Medical Staff. The movement commenced with the
women, and took the form of preparing lint and
bandages for the hospitals; but it was soon dis
covered that vastly more would be required by
the enormous force about to be put in the field,
and that much really valuable assistance might be
rendered by voluntary philanthropy. Two ques
tions presented themselves for solution:—Firstly,
what kind of aid would be accepted by the War
�8
Department
secondly, how could that assistance
he rendered without infringement of military disci
pline, so as to be acceptable to the Medical Staff?
The answer to these important questions could
only be obtained at head-quarters, and a deputation
of influential citizens was forthwith despatched to
Washington. After asking for the appointment of
a Special Commission to be charged, as the Depu
tation expressed itself, with “ preventing the evils
that England and France could only investigate and
deplore,” the envoys demanded for it the follow
ing powers from the Government.
“ 1. The Commission being organized for the purposes only of
inquiry and advice, asks for no legal powers, but only the
official recognition and moral countenance of the Government,
which will be secured by its public appointment. It asks
for a recommendatory order, addressed in its favour to all
officers of the Government, to further its inquiries; for per
mission to correspond and confer, on a confidential footing,
with the Medical Bureau and the War Department, proffering
such suggestions and counsels as its investigation and studies
may, from time to time, prompt and enable it to offer.
“2. The Commission seeks no pecuniary remuneration from the
Government. Its motives being humane andpatriotic, its labours
will be its own reward. The assignment to them of a room in
one of the public buildings, with stationery and other neces
sary conveniences, would meet their expectations in this direc
tion.
“3. The Commission asks leave to sit through the war,
either in Washington, or when and where it may find it most
convenient and useful; but it will disband should experience
render its operations embarrassing to the Government, or
�9
Jess necessary and useful than it is now supposed they will
prove.”
“ The general object of the Commission is, through sugges
tions reported from time to time to the Medical Bureau and
the War Department, to bring to bear upon the health, com
fort and morale of our troops, the fullest and ripest teachings
of sanitary science in its application to military life, whether
deduced from theory or practical observation, from general
hygienic principles, or from the experience of the Crimean,
the East Indian, and the Italian wars. Its objects are purely
advisory.
“ The specific points to which its attention would be directed
may here be partly indicated, but in some part may depend
upon the course of events, and the results of its own observa
tions and promptings, when fairly at work. If it knew pre
cisely what the results of its own inquiries would be, it would
state them at once, without asking for that authority and those
governmental facilities essential to a successful investigation
of the subject. As the Government may select its own Com
missioners,—the persons named in the recommendation of the
Medical Bureau being wholly undesirous, however willing, to
serve, if other persons more deserving of the confidence of the
Government and of the public can be nominated,—it is hoped
that the character of the Commission will be the best warrant
the Government can have that the inquiries of the Commission,
both as to their nature and the manner of conducting them,
will be pursued with discretion and a careful eye to avoiding
impertinent and offensive interference with the legal authority
and official rights of any of the bureaus with which it may be
brought in contact.”
“ The Commission proposes a practical inquiry into the ma
terial of the volunteer force, with reference to the laws and
usages of the several States in the matter of inspection, with
the hope of assimilating their regulations with those of the
army proper, alike in the appointment of medical and other
�10
officers and in the rigorous application of just rules and prin
ciples to recruiting and inspection laws. This inquiry would
exhaust every topic appertaining to the materiel of the army,
considered as a subject of sanitary and medical care.
“ The Commission would inquire with scientific thorough
ness into the subject of diet, cooking, cooks, clothing, tents,
camping grounds, transports, transitory depots, with their ex
posures, camp police, with reference to settling the question,
How far the regulations of the Army proper are or can be
practically carried out among the volunteer regiments, and
what changes or modifications are desirable from their peculiar
character and circumstances ? Everything appertaining to
outfit, cleanliness, precautions against damp, cold, heat, ma
laria, infection; crude, unvaried, or ill-cooked food, and an
irregular or careless regimental commissariat, would fall under
this head.
“ The Commission would inquire into the organization of
military hospitals, general and regimental; the precise regula
tions and routine through which the services of the patriotic
women of the country may be made available as nurses; the
nature and sufficiency of hospital supplies; the method of
obtaining and regulating all other extra and unbought supplies
contributing to the comfort of the sick; the question of am
bulances and field service, and of extra medical aid ; and what
ever else relates to the care, relief, or cure of the sick and
wounded—their investigations being guided by the highest and
latest medical and military experience, and carefully adapted to
the nature and wants of our immediate army, and its peculiar
origin and circumstances.”
There was every necessity for the establishment
of such a Commission with such objects, and armed
with the required powers. The Army of the United
States had suddenly risen from 15,000 to 80,000
men, while the old Medical Staff, based on the
�11
peace establishment, stood in absolute need of re
organization and proportionate increase. But the
bureaucracy there, as elsewhere, frowned upon all
suggestion as impertinent interference, and steadily
resisted reform; and it was only after many days’
delay that the required authority was accorded by
the War Department, and the Sanitary Commission
of the United States came into being.
The organization of the United States Sanitary
Commission, the mode in which it obtains its vast
resources from the masses of the people and distri
butes them over an area half as large as the Conti
nent of Europe, is well worthy investigation. The
Commission, it may be said, has greatly exceeded
the duties marked out by itself at the commence
ment of its career; it has gone far beyond merely
advising the Medical Staff, for it now supplements
it in an extraordinary manner, even to the extent of
rendering medical assistance in the hospital and
field, and in the front of battle itself.*
The supplies furnished to the different armies of
the Republic by the Commission are of the most
varied description, comprising everything required
by the soldier outside of purely military requisites.
The Government has not pecuniarily aided the
Commission in this labour of love to the extent of
a single dollar; every article, every pound of the
two millions sterling contributed in specie, has been
given by the citizens as- a free-will offering. The
* See Appendix, (Note A.)
�12
Commission, in fact, has been the Almoner of the
people, the channel through which its offerings
have been conveyed to the soldiers. No better
idea of its work can be found, than by giving a
list of the supplies furnished by it to the Army of
the Potomac, at the close of the battle of Gettysburgh, which took place in the month of July,
1863.
Clothing, &c.
Drawers, woollen 5,310 prs.
„
cotton
1,833 „
Shirts, woollen . 7,178
„ cotton
3,266
Pillows
2,114
Pillow-cases
264
Bed-sacks ;
1,630
Blankets
1,007
Sheets
274
Wrappers .
508
Handkerchiefs . 2,659
Stockings, woollen 3,560 prs.
„
cotton 2,258 „
Bed Utensils
728
Towels & Napkins 10,000
Sponges
2,300
Combs
1,500
Buckets
200
Soap, Castile
250 lbs.
Oil-silk
Tin-basins & cups
Old linen and
bandages
Water tanks
Water coolers .
Bay Rum and Eau
de Cologne
Eans .
Chloride of Lime
Shoes & Slippers
Crutches .
Lanthorns .
Candles
Canvas
Mosquito-netting
Paper
Pants, Coats, Hats
Plaster
Pood, &c.
Poultry and Mut
Berries
ton
Bread
.
11,000 lbs.
Tamarinds .
Butter
6,430 „
Eggs .
8,500 doz. Lemons
Garden vegetables
675 bsh. Oranges
300 yds.
7,000
100 brls.
7
46
225 bots.
3,500
11 brls.
4,000 prs.
1,200
180
350 lbs.
300 yds.
648 pcs.
237 qrs.
189 pcs.
16 rolls
48 bsh.
. 12,900 lvs.
750 gals.
116 box.
46
�18
Coffee
850 lbs.
Chocolate .
831 „
Tea
426 „
White Sugar
6,800 „
Syrups
785bots.
Brandy
1,250 „
Whiskey
1,168 „
Wine
1,148 „
Ale .
600 gals.
Biscuit, rusks, &c
134 bar.
Preserved Meats
500 lbs.
Ice
20,000 „
Concentrated
Beef Soup
3,800 „
Concent. Milk . 12,500 „
Prep. Farina
7,000 „
Dried Fruit
Jellies
Preserved Fish .
Pickles
Tobacco
Tobacco pipes. .
Indian Meal
Starch
Codfish
Canned Fruit
„
Oysters
Brandy Peaches .
Catsup
Vinegar
Jam. Ginger
3,500 lbs.
2,000 jars
3,600 lbs.
400 gals.
100 lbs.
1,000
1,621 lbs.
1,074 „
3,848 ,,
582 cans
72 „
303 jars.
43 „
24 hots.
43 jars
All the perishable articles in this list (amounting*
to over 60 tons), were taken to the ground in
refrig*erating wag*g*ons. The estimated value of the
articles, exclusive of the cost of collection and
transportation to the scene of action, was 75,000
dollars; kitchens, sleeping* apartments, shelters,
were established by the Commission’s numerous
agents; and crowds of wounded attended to, who
could not be treated by the over-taxed surgeons of
the army. There was every need of this, for no
less than 14,860 wounded (of whom 1810 belonged
to the opposing forces) crowded the hospitals,
beside 5,452 of the enemy who were captured, and
treated elsewhere. The Commission made and
makes no difference whatever in its gifts to friend
or foe, regarding the sufferers as men, not soldiers.
�14
’ This is but an example of the Commission’s la
bours on a single field : multiply this result by the
different armies operating over an extent of territory
large as the battle-fields of the first Napoleon, in
volving expenses for transport (all paid by itself or
furnished gratuitously by public companies), ship
ping, and trains being in charge of its own agents,
and waggons, horses and mules owned by itself, and
some idea may be formed of the magnitude of its
operations. The outgoings are public, the incomings
are not so well known; yet these involve a greater
amount of labour and management than even the
former. In all the cities, towns and villages of the
Free States, the citizens, and notably the women,
have organized themselves into Branch Aid Socie
ties, which furnish contributions in kind and money
to a Central Committee in the various districts;
these again communicate with the Main Branches
in the great centres, such as New York, Philadel
phia, Washington, Chicago, and Saint Louis, whence
the supplies are distributed to the troops in the
field. As a still more popular mode of engaging
the sympathies of the public, Sanitary Commission
Fairs have been held in many of the principal cities,
and large sums raised thereby for the benefit of the
soldiers. The State of California sent in one lump
500,000 dollars (£100,000 sterling) in gold to the
Treasurer. The Fair at Chicago realized 50,000
dollars, that held in the city of Cincinnati 268,611
dollars, Brooklyn over 400,000 dollars, Philadel
�15
phia over 700,000 dollars, and the city of New
York upwards of 1,000,000 dollars. Yet, vast as
are these contributions, the calls for aid are still
greater, and that notwithstanding the increasing
liberality of the public as the operations of the Com
mission become more widely known.
It is well to remark that the Commission makes
it a rule to pay all its employees, not merely as a
matter of justice, but of sound policy. Every ex
pense, from first to last, of carrying on these gi
gantic operations is, however, less than three per
cent of its income.
Its doors are ever open to
all comers, and any one may inspect its books who
sees fit.
The Medical Staff of the United States Army at
present regards the Commission as its faithful hand
maiden in the field, the hospital and the camp, and
nothing but praise is now heard from those who
formerly were its bitter opponents.* The reason is
obvious. The Sanitary Commission has solved a
question which is still an enigma to other nations,
for it has proved by three years of colossal labours
that Military Discipline and Volunteer Philanthropy
can exist side by side, and work together harmo
niously for the exceeding benefit of the Army.
Lest I be accused of national partiality for an
organization which will reflect glory upon the
American people long after this war is over, I may
be permitted to quote the words of an English
* See Appendix (Note B.)
�16
philosopher, whose reputation stands as high in my
country as in his own. Mr. John Stuart Mill
thus writes in reference to the United States Sani
tary Commission :—
“It would be unpardonable did I omit to express my
warmest feelings of admiration for the Sanitary Commission.
History has afforded no other example—though it is to be
hoped that it will hereafter afford many—of so great a work
of usefulness extemporized by the spontaneous self-devotion
and organizing genius of a people, altogether independently of
the Government.”
This Volunteer Sanitary Commission has fur
nished to the different armies of the Republic since
the commencement of the war, four millions of pounds
sterling- of army necessaries, comforts, and luxuries.
Its establishment, org-anization, magnitude and
achievements prove three things:—
Firstly. The Armies of a Nation can be ren
dered incomparably more efficient by the volun
teer aid and assistance of the people,—without the
slightest infringement of military discipline, or inter
ference with the constituted medical authorities of
armies.
Secondly. The American Civil War affords the
brightest precedent of spontaneous and yet organized
benevolence, and furnishes an example which other
nations will do well to emulate.
Thirdly. The whole of the American people—
men, women, and children alike, in thus rendering
their armies efficient, prove conclusively that the
�war is not carried on—as many in Europe suppose,
—by the Government of a minority, but is waged by
the great mass of the citizens themselves. In no
other way can you explain the colossal achievements
of this Volunteer Commission.
�18
APPENDIX.
Note A.
After the defeat of General Burnside’s army at Fredericks
burg, in the month of December 1862, the surgeons sent
forward by the Sanitary Commission treated upwards of 8,000
wounded on the field. At Gettysburgh, 13,050 Federals, and
7,260 Confederates were cared for by the medical employees of
that body. There have been few engagements during the war in
which the Commission has not similarly rendered aid to the
overworked medical staff of the different armies. During
General Gillmore’s attack on Fort Wagner, in Charleston Har
bour, the Belief Agents of the Commission marched with the
assaulting columns to the very moat around the fort: the Port
Boyal Free Press thus refers to their courageous labours :—
“ The Officers of the Sanitary Commission have won for them
selves a splendid reputation in this Department. They have, by
their discretion and zeal, saved many valuable lives. Under the
guns of Wagner, in the hottest of the fire, their trained corps
picked up and carried off the wounded almost as they fell. As
many of our men were struck while ascending the parapet and then
rolled into the moat, which at high water contains six feet of water,
they must inevitably have perished had they been suffered to re
main. But the men who were detailed for service with Dr. Marsh
(chief agent of the Commission in the Department) went about
their work with intrepidity and coolness worthy of all praise.
The skill and experience of the members of the Commission has,
since the battle, been unremittingly employed to render comfortable
the sick and wounded.”
The Commission has established a special “Field Belief
Corps,” the members of which are provided with light waggons,
containing such remedies and necessaries as surgeons most
require in the heat of an engagement; and these waggons with
�19
their attendants are always to be found in the front of the
battle where men are falling the fastest. At the close of the
action, the members of the corps hunt up the straggling
wounded, assist them to the ambulances and temporary hospitals,
and treat them both surgically and medically when the atten
tion of regular army surgeons is engaged elsewhere.
Depabtment
of
Special Relief.
The objects for which this Department was created, are thus
described by the Commission itself.
1. To supply to the sick men of the newly-arrived regiments such
-medicines, food, and care, as it is impossible for them to receive in
the midst of the confusion, and with the unavoidable lack of
facilities, from their own officers. The men to be thus aided
are those who are not so sick as to have a claim upon a gene
ral hospital, and yet need immediate care to guard them against
serious sickness.
2. To furnish suitable food, lodging, care, and assistance, to men
who are honourably discharged from service, sent from general
hospitals, or from their regiments; but who are often delayed a
day or more in the city—sometimes many days—before they obtain
their papers and pay.
3. To communicate with distant regiments in behalf of discharged
men, whose certificates of disability or descriptive lists on which
to draw their pay, prove to be defective ; the invalid soldiers mean
time being cared for, and not exposed to the fatigue and risk of
going in person to their regiments to have their papers corrected.
4. To act as the unpaid agent, or attorney, of discharged soldiers
who are too feeble, or too utterly disabled to present their own
claims at the paymaster’s office.
5. To look into the condition of discharged men who assume to
be without means to pay the expense of going to their homes ; and
to furnish the necessary means where we find the man is true, and
the need real.
6. To secure to disabled soldiers railway tickets at reduced rates ;
and, through an agent at the railroad station, to see that these men
are not robbed or imposed upon by sharpers.
7. To see that all men who are discharged and paid off, do at
once leave the city for their homes; or in cases where they have
been induced by evil companions to remain behind, to endeavour
to rescue them, and see them started with through tickets to their
own towns.
.
8. To make reasonably clean and comfortable before they leave
the city, such discharged men as are deficient in cleanliness and
clothes.
9. To be prepared to meet at once with food or other aid, such
immediate necessities as arise when sick men arrive in the city in
large numbers from battle-fields, or distant hospitals.
�20
10. To keep a watchful eye upon all soldiers who are out of
hospitals, yet not in service ; and give information to the proper
authorities of such soldiers as seem endeavouring to avoid duty, or
to desert from the ranks.
Soldiers’ Homes.
There is a period in the soldier’s career when he may be
considered no longer under military surveillance and care, and
yet not restored to civil life and the sympathy of his friends
or family; men, for instance, discharged or waiting for their
discharge from service, or sick or wounded, and unable to pro
ceed home. To meet such cases,—and there are tens of thou
sands such,—the Sanitary Commission has established “ Sol
diers’ Homes” in the great cities of the North .and within easy
distance of the principal armies. At the “ Home” on North
Capitol Street, Washington, the Commission had provided no
less than 89,986 nights’ lodging, and 331,315 meals up to the
1st October 1863, and at Cairo, Illinois, to the same date,
79,550 lodgings and 190,150 meals. It must be borne in mind
that all this relief is furnished absolutely gratuitously.
“Nurses’ Homes.”
Similar homes have been provided for the nurses (male and
female) of the Army and the Commission when not engaged in
their duties or about to proceed to other fields of labour.
Relief is here given also to the wives, mothers and sisters of the
troops in search of relatives in the army, and who might other
wise be friendless and destitute.
Other
objects oe the
“Special Reliee.”
This branch of the Commission obtains “ discharge papers”
for the men entitled to them; their back-pay; and railroad
and other tickets at reduced rates for soldiers returning home.
“ The Hospital Directory,” established by this Department,
contains the name and address of every sick and wounded man
in all the military hospitals throughout the country, with a
full statement of the ailment from which he is suffering, and
his present whereabouts.
�21
An
important
Fact.
The various labours of the United States Sanitary Commis
sion are purely gratuitous. No charge has ever been made, no
return other than simple thanks is ever expected for its con
stantly increasing labours and outlay.
Note B.
Testimonials
from
GENERAL
Army Officers.
grant.
“ Headquarters Department of the Tennessee.
“ Vicksburg, Miss., Sept. 28, 1863.
“ Commanding Officer, Cairo, Ill.
“ Sir,—Direct the Post Quartermaster at Cairo to call upon
the United States Sanitary agent at your place, and see exactly
what buildings they require to be erected for their charitable
and humane purposes.
“ The Commission has been of such great service to the
country, and at Cairo are doing so much for this army at this
time, that I am disposed to extend their facilities for doing
good in every way in my power.
******
(Signed)
“ U. S. Grant,
“ Major General.”
MAJOR GENERAL ROSECRANS.
“ Headquarters, Department of the Cumberland.
“ Murfreesboro, February 2, 1863.
“ The General Commanding presents his warmest acknow
ledgments to the friends of the soldiers of this army. * * *
While he highly appreciates and does not undervalue the
�2'2
charities which have been lavished on this Army, experience
has demonstrated the importance of system and impartiality,
as well as judgment and economy, in the forwarding and dis
tribution of these supplies. In all these respects, the United
States Sanitary Commission stands unrivalled. Its organiza
tion, experience, and large facilities for the work are such that
the General does not hesitate to recommend, in the most
urgent manner, all those who desire to send sanitary supplies
to confide them to the care of this Commission. They will
thus insure the supplies reaching their destination without
wastage, or expense of agents or transportation, and their
being distributed in a judicious manner without disorder or
interference with the regulations and usages of the service.
“ This Commission acts in full concert with the Medical
Department of the Army, and enjoys its confidence,” &c.
“ W. S. Rosecrabs. '
“Major General, Commanding Department.”
MAJOR GENERAL MEADE.
“ Headquarters, Army of the Potomac.
“ Friday, April 8,1864.
A
Jfc
-Jfc
*
-Jfe
jfc
“ It has been my duty to make inquiry as to the practical
working and benefit of the United States Sanitary Commission,
and it affords me great pleasure to be able to bear testimony,
so far as this army is concerned, to the inestimable benefits and
blessings conferred by this noble association on the suffering,
sick, and wounded soldiers.
*
*
*
*
#
“ Now, although the Government is most liberal and generous
in all its provisions for the sick and wounded, yet it is impos
sible to keep constantly on hand either the personnel or supplies
required in an emergency of this kind. * * * All the
additional aid from every source was here most urgently
needed, and it gives me great pleasure to say that,/hw the
*
�23
reports of my medical officers, I am satisfied the United States
Sanitary Commission were fully up to the work before them.
“ George Gt. Meade,
" Major General, Commanding Army of the Potomac.”
Opinions
of two
Armt Surgeons.
THE MEDICAL INSPECTOR OF THE ARMY OF
THE POTOMAC.
u We could not do without the Sanitary Commission.”
THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE ARMY OF
THE POTOMAC.
“ It gives no trouble : there is no interference.”
THE END.-
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Military discipline and volunteer philanthropy: a paper read before the Social Science Congress held in the city of York, during the month of September, 1864
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Fisher, Edmund Crisp
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 23 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: The United States Sanitary Commission (USSC) was a private relief agency created by federal legislation on June 18 1861, to support sick and wounded soldiers of the United States Army (Federal /Northern / Union Army) during the American Civil War. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William Ridgway
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Subject
The topic of the resource
Military
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Military discipline and volunteer philanthropy: a paper read before the Social Science Congress held in the city of York, during the month of September, 1864), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5376
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
American Civil War
Conway Tracts
Discipline
Military
Military Volunteers
United States - Army
United States Sanitary Commission
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/bac74f6bba313c9b2971d0a3366b0882.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=o06oBCdRppqrhNA2azolsNrbRCBnvEAh617RZB1CANwb0JbFXl2XjY2XEKdh3UBbeuNTtraqciF3BDfqVr8AcnvijVpDSkUPel65Q-Wirpe3DpXTE9jUdEfVk8pbTBUWB%7EiuL7ITMO7RX7rpqjKMijKOc65GT2awV6G%7E1k39KYnaY9L258W5XD7itsM-1Uc0Ivl0I4mIS%7EumDOThrCZ94K4nFh9akdon%7E-xQzypJyw3NhDCJtWZ6k-C-iSIVYRX0S7-L463zBXi2bxemDgcJkBFd87dyB17XHKSoEMZdTKSule1Qvh8MVVnwPHUe46Aw6c%7E%7E4WPJdPEfOwjBrvKvhg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
de80925bb1f582f9d5156bbcc35a9440
PDF Text
Text
® t s f i in £rn i HI s
IN FAVOUR OF THE
■M.
REV. JOHN BURNELL PAYNE, \A.,
CANDIDATE FOR THE PROFESSORSHIP
OF ENGLISH
LITERATURE
AND HISTORY AT OWEN’S COLLEGE, MANCHESTER.
�INDEX.
I. Professor Birkbeck.
II. E. E. Bowen, Esq.
III. Rev. W. G. Clark.
IV. Rev. T. L. Kinsbury.
V. F. T. Palgrave, Esq.
VI. H. Sidgwick, Esq.
VII. C. A. Buchheim, Ph.D.
VIII. H. Lee Warner, Esq.
IX. Henry Jackson, M.A.
X. A. Sidgwick.
XI. Oscar Browning.
XII. F. C. Hodgson.
XIII. A. C. Swinburne.
XIV. Thos. Woolmer.
XV. Thos. Hodgson.
XVI. A. W. Benson.
XVII. T. H. Fisher.
XVIII. Joseph Bickersteth.
XIX. De Guingand.
�Wellington College,
May 12, 1866,
Gentlemen,
In forwarding for your inspection my Testimonials, I beg
to state a few other particulars which I think may be important.
I am 27 years of age, and unmarried.
In 1858 I took the Degree of B.A. in the University of London,
with Classical Honours.
I had previously studied for two years at University College,
London. The length of time since my connection with University
College ceased, alone prevented my troubling the Trustees with
Testimonials from my Tutors there, who were good enough to
help me to gain a position as private tutor shortly after my
leaving there.
In 1860 I entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, which I left
in 1862, on gaining a Scholarship, open to the whole University,
at Downing College,
In 1864 I took the Degree of B.A., and was in the Second
Class in Classical Honours, First Class in the Moral Sciences
Tripos.
After Christmas 1864-5 I became an Assistant-Master here,
and at the Christmas Ordination 1865-6 I was ordained Deacon
by the Bishop of Oxford.
Trusting that if I receive the honour of your selection I may
deserve it, and assured that my best efforts will in that case be
devoted to the service of your College,
I remain, Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
J. B. PAYNE,
The Trustees of Owen’s College, Manchester,
��TESTIMONIALS.
*
I
Downing College,
June Is?, 1864.
My dear Sir,
From the opportunity I have had of forming an opinion,
I believe you possess very considerable knowledge of English
and General Literature, as well as the power of expressing your
views with facility and clearness. I have no doubt that you
would perform with much ability the duties of the office for
which you are a candidate.
Believe me, my dear Sir,
Yours very sincerely,
W. Ll. birkbeck,
Downing Professor of Laws in the
University of Cambridge.
To J. B. Payne, Esq.
* This Testimonial and others marked with an asterisk were presented in
support of an application for the Professorship of English Literature at Lam
peter College.
B 2
�6
II *
Harrow, N.W.
Gentlemen,
Having been informed that my friend Mr. J. B. Payne is
a candidate for the Professorship of English Literature and
History at Owen’s College, I have no hesitation in stating
my belief that the College will be most fortunate should it
succeed in obtaining his services.
Everyone who has known Cambridge for the last few
years must be aware of the reputation which Mr. Payne
has acquired for proficiency in these and kindred subjects. I am
not in a position to speak with authority on his classical attain
ments, to which he will of course find many to do justice ; but
I know him to be well versed in the literature of our own
country as well as that of others, and to be, both in speaking
and in writing, no mean master of the language.
By his knowledge, fluency, and taste, Mr. Payne is eminently fitted for lecturing a class; and his general ability and
high character will be esteemed by every student.
I have the honor to be, Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
E. E. BOAVEN,
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; AssistantMaster in Harrow School.
HI.
Cambridge.
Mr. J. Burnell Payne, B.A., of Downing College, and
late of Trinity, informs me that he is a candidate for the vacant
Professorship at Owen’s College.
I have much pleasure in stating that in my opinion he is well
qualified for such an office. He has excellent abilities, and an
extensive knowledge of Modern Literature, English, German, and
French. As he is also able to express himself with fluency, he
would, in my opinion, be an effective lecturer.
W. G. CLARK,
Tutor of Trinity College {Public Orator
in the University').
�7
.
*
IV
Trinity College, Cambridge.
I have known Mr. Payne intimately for some years, and
have great pleasure in expressing my conviction that he is
eminently fitted by his literary tastes and habits, an extraordinarily
wide range of reading, and his familiar acquaintance with other
modern literatures beside that of his own country, to discharge
with peculiar efficiency and credit the duties of the post for
which he is a candidate.
Having received his education partly in Germany, he has
diligently availed himself of the opportunities thus afforded him
of acquiring a familiar and accurate knowledge of the language
and literature of that country, and his proficiency in both
respects is such as even the most cultivated Englishmen very
rarely attain to.
T. L. KINGSBURY,
Chaplain of Trinity College.
N
Whitehall.
• Having had the pleasure of knowing Mr. J. B. Payne
for some years, and having myself had considerable experience
in the line of work which he is desirous of carrying on at
Manchester, I think that I may, without presumption, express
the opinion that he possesses more than common qualifications
for a “ Professorship of English Literature, Language, and
History.” In English Literature, which has more frequently been
discussed between us, he seems to me to have an unusually wide
and accurate range of knowledge, with a lively power of criticising
what he has read. I think him a man successful in giving
others the interest which he himself feels in literature, and that,
as a teacher, he would be eminently likely to lead his pupils to a
broad, and, at the same time, an accurate knowledge of his
subject.
F. T. PALGRAVE,
Late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, and VicePresident of the Kneller Hall Normal
Training School; at present Examiner in the
Education Office.
�8
*
VI
Gentlemen,
I am requested to testify to the qualifications of Mr. J. B.
Payne for the Professorship of English and General Literature.
I have known Mr. Payne intimately for some years, and am con
vinced that he is unusually well qualified for such a post. His
acquaintance with our own literature, especially the earlier
writers, is very extensive. His knowledge of the French and
German languages is accurate and complete, and his familiarity
with the best writings in those languages remarkable in an
Englishman. He has a sensitive perception of style, and a sound
and cultivated judgment of literary merit of all kinds. He has
laboriously mastered the writings of the most important thinkers
in England and on the Continent, since the re-awakening of
thought in Europe ; and has successfully trained his mind to take
profound and philosophic views of all subjects upon which he
employs it. He, moreover, combines with this capacity for wide
and general views a strong interest in the individualties of
different authors, and a genuine enthusiasm which would prevent
the study of literature from ever becoming a dry and lifeless one
in his hands.
I cannot blit add, that he possesses in a high degree the power
of stimulating other minds with which he comes into contact,
and of communicating to them his own vivid intellectual interest.
This faculty, combined with the clearness of head and readiness
of expression that he possesses, can hardly fail to render him a
successful teacher.
I am, Gentlemen,
Faithfully yours,
HENRY SIDGWICK,
Fellow and Assistant Tutor of Trinity College,
Cambridge.
�9
VII.
King’s College London,
May Yith, 1866.
Enjoying the privilege of a personal acquaintance with
Mr. Payne, of Wellington College, I have much pleasure in
bearing testimony to his high literary attainments, and to his
perfect knowledge of the history and literature, not only of his
own country, but also of that of Germany and France. As a
further recommendation of Mr. Payne, for whom I entertain the
highest respect both as a scholar and a gentleman, I beg to add
that he possesses in an eminent degree a sincere devotion to the
educational profession, and that he is fully acquainted with the
best methods of teaching.
C. A. BUCHHEIM, Ph.D.,
Professor of the German Language and Literature
in King's College; and Examiner in German
to the University of London.
VIII.
Rugby,
May 10, 1866.
My Dear Payne,
I have much pleasure in being able to testify to my
belief that you know more of English Literature than most of
your and my contemporaries at Cambridge. If I am at all
qualified to judge, your knowledge was of a very superior kind;
and of this I am certain, that 1 often derived great instruction
from a walk or a talk with you. Of your fitness for the place, as
regards the interest you take in the subject, no one could doubt.
Of your proficiency I have no doubt.
Believe me,
Yours sincerely,
H. LEE WARNER,
Fellow of S. John's College, Cambridge, Assistant
Master in Rugby School.
�10
IX.
Having been informed that Mr. J. B. Payne, of Downing
College, Cambridge, is a candidate for the vacant Professorship
of English Language and Literature at Owen’s College, Man
chester, I have great pleasure in testifying to my belief of his
fitness for the post. During the last three years I have had
frequent opportunities of forming an estimate of his knowledge
and abilities. He has read extensively in all branches of
literature : in particular he has studied vour early authors with
unusual care. I well remember his acute and just criticisms
upon certain of our less known poets. His own style is fluent
and lively. His love of the artistic, which amounts to
enthusiasm, joined with a remarkable faculty of continuous
exposition and great fertility of illustration, cannot fail to
interest any audience.
I may add that Mr. Payne is well acquainted with the
literature of Greece and Rome, and with the principal languages
of modern Europe.
HENRY JACKSON, M.A.,
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
X.
Rugby,
May 10, 1866.
Gentlemen,
Mr. J. B. Payne was an intimate friend of mine during a
considerable part of my residence at Cambridge, and I am there
fore in a position to speak of his abilities not without confidence.
His acquaintance with English Literature is unusually exten
sive ; and he is at the same time possessed of a vividness and
fluency in his powers of expression which cannot fail to stimulate
all whom he has to teach.
His critical powers are sensitive and developed; and he
belongs to that small class, even among cultivated men, whose
minds can be said to be really active.
As a teacher of any subject he knows, he would be un
doubtedly good; of a subject with which he is so well acquainted
as English Literature he would be most excellent.
Believe me,
Yours obediently,
ARTHUR SIDGWICK.
�11
XI.
Eton College,
May 11.
I am extremely glad to hear that my friend the Rev. J. B.
P^yne is a candidate for the Professorship of English Language,
Literature, and History at Owen’s College, Manchester, as, from
his great knowledge of English and Foreign Literature, his
cultivated taste for beauty, and his clearness and facility of
expression, he appears to me admirably suited to fill such a post
with credit.
OSCAR BROWNING,
Assistant Master at Eton College.
XII.
May 11, 1866.
I have very great pleasure in stating that I believe
Mr. J. B. Payne, who is now a Candidate for the Professorship
of English Language and Literature at Owen’s College, to be
exceedingly well qualified by a wide acquaintance with English
Literature for that position. I believe also that his intimate
knowledge of the Language and Literature of France and Ger
many, as well as of the results of the Science of Comparative
Philology, would render him highly qualified for the scientific
Teaching of the English Language.
F. C. HODGSON,
Fellow of King's College, Cambridge.
XIII.
I have enjoyed for some time the acquaintance of
Mr. J. Burnell Payne. No man who can say the same could fail
to perceive and to admire his varied and accurate knowledge,
his fine and critical relish of the higher literature. Few have
ever seemed to me so fit to hold, so certain to adorn, an office in
which this taste and this talent would find scope at once and use.
A. 0. SWINBURNE.
Author of Atalanta tn Ceylon ” and u ChartelardA
�29, Welbeck Street, W.,
May 10, 1866,
I have been acquainted with the Rev. J. B. Payne for
about eleven years, and, from numerous conversations during
that time, believe him to possess not only an unusually extensive
knowledge of English Literature, both prose and poetical, but
likewise an exceedingly vivid power of expressing his own views
upon the subject, and awakening a similar interest in his audience
to that which he himself feels.
THOS. WOOLNER,
Author of “ My Beautiful Ladyf
XV.
May 10, 1866.
Gentlemen,
Though my acquaintance with the Rev. Mr. Payne is
of recent date, and though I have never had an opportunity of
hearing him lecture, I have been frequently, in intercourse with
him, been much impressed by the evidence he has incidentally
given of his extensive knowledge and thoughtful appreciation of
English Literature, and of the amount of reading- that he has
accomplished, not in careless haste, but with profitable result.
From all that I know or have heard of him, I am much disposed
to believe that if he were entrusted with the Professorship to
which he aspires he would speedily earn a reputation for him
self, to the great gain of the Students and the honour of the
College.
I remain,
Yours respectfully,
W. B. HODGSON, L.L.D.,
Vice-President of the College of Preceptors,
Examiner in the University of London, fyc.
�13
XVI.
May 10, 1866.
The Rev. J. B. Payne has been a year and a half a
Master on the Modern side of Wellington College, and now has
the most important part in the administration and teaching of the
Modern Classes.
He is an excellent modern linguist, and is both widely read
and most deeply interested in Modern Literature, English and
Foreign. He is fond of teaching in itself as an art, and has
most successfully cultivated it. I know, indeed, very few men
whom I consider to be equally apt in catching a student’s diffi
culties, weighing them, and meeting them by clear and lucid
statement.
He has great promptness, and fluency of expression, and is
happy in illustration.
Both by knowledge, therefore, and by cultivation, Mr. Payne
appears to me to be excellently adapted for the public duties of
the post which he now seeks; and at the same time his influence
and example would, I am sure, be exceedingly stimulating to the
private studies of his class.
E. W. BENSON,
Master of Wellington College,
Late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
XVII.
Wellington College,
May 11.
Gentlemen,
I have been associated here with Mr. Payne since he
has been at the College, and have had opportunity of observing
his knowledge of History, and his extensive acquaintance with
English Literature ; and if conversation be any criterion for public
lecturing, I can also bear witness to his great dexterity in
weaving his literary knowledge into what he says to those about
him. He has, besides, always had among us the reputation of
an excellent teacher.
I have the honour to be,
Yours obediently,
T. H. FISHER,
Mathematical Master
�14
XVIII.
May 10th, 1866.
The Rev. J. B. Payne, attended my lectures in the
Moral Sciences in St. John’s College, and appeared to me to
show not only great interest in the subject, but remarkable
freshness of thought and power of expression. I believe that
the Examiners for the Moral Sciences Tripos formed the same
estimate of Mr. Payne’s ability from the papers which he sent
up in that examination.
I have little doubt that he would prove an effective lecturer.
JOSEPH BICKERSTETII MAYOR M.A.,
Head Master of Kensington School; late Fellow and
Tutor of St. John's College, Cambridge.
XIX
Mon cher Monsieur Payne,
Si vous me demandez ce que je pense de votre connaissance
de la langue et de la litterature Fran^aise, je repondrai a cela,
toute consideration de camaraderie mise de cote, que je vous
crois aussi bien verse dans la litterature Franc;aise qu’aucun de
nous ; que de plus vous savez fort judicieusement en apprecier la
valeur, et qu’enfin vous possedez notre langue de maniere
a l’ecrire et a la parler presqu’aussi bien qu’un Francis, et
qu’un Fran^ais instruit.
Votre tout devout,
DE GUIGNAND.
Professor of French at Wellington College.
�LONDON:
PRINTED BY HARRISON AND SONS,
st. martin’s lane.
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Testimonials in favour of the Rev. John Burnell Payne, M.A., candidate for the professorship of English literature and history at Owen's College, Manchester
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Payne, John Burnell
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 14 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5682
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Testimonials in favour of the Rev. John Burnell Payne, M.A., candidate for the professorship of English literature and history at Owen's College, Manchester), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Education
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1eb300809101f85e15731cf61aee4122.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=JjvQOZJbdNtMZ8UcMb7rh%7EcvXMOG6D-7JgtUQmx0a5jFhwYIBv9RPsOtwDGvzJ9nDYCq6foPDDk7ZFP6oK8iQGSkgqI-2zxxCCKgFEur4PtjuDQHsBV1Nf92C4BlKLjcmFf1TY1gwVHHO0GzjTxEPzCI-YNOn5f2SOgR0miKSWIZRDW8tRgqWwtxrddjHAgh8EepREp-bhv9qWO1IqklXt33JWz3ApWWag3Jiqipi7poQrzHmvVSPD4axtM-KO96EaA5fI5cix9NY2rCxyCDGToo81Lcf2d-NpJOVyPJRLszV3aGUuPl50629%7EQrjrmA2Cqul4nWAySkb3nohq6zPw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e8b3ed319e01ece73942cf575769712a
PDF Text
Text
REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS
APPOINTED TO
INQUIRE
INTO
THE
CONDITION
OF
*
THE
PRINCIPAL
PUBLIC SCHOOLS:
fir
A PAPER READ AT THE MQNTHLY EVENING MEETING OF THE
COLLEGE OF PRECEPTORS, MAY 11th, 1864.
BY
W. B. HODGSON, Esq., LL.D., F.C.P.
“ Falsa est querela paueissimis hominibus vim percipiendi quae tradantur esse concessam; plerosque
vero laborem et tempora tarditate ingenii perdere. Nam contra plures reperias et faciles in excogitando,
et ad discendum promptos. Quippe id est homini naturale: ac sicut aves ad volatum, equi ad cursum, ad
saevitiam ferae gignuntur. ita nobis propria est mentis agitatio atque solertia; unde origo animi coelestis
creditur. Hebetes vero et indociles non magis secundum naturam hominis eduntur, quam prodigiosa cor
pora et monstris insignia : sed hi pauci admodum. Fuerit argumentum, quod in pueris elucet spes plurimorum: quae cum emoritur aetate, manifestum est non naturam defecisse, sed curam."—M. F. Quinctilian.
Inst. Orat. lib. 1. c. 1.
“ Those who, in their own minds, their health, or their fortunes, feel the cursed effects of a wrong
education, wonld do well to consider they cannot better make amends for what was amiss in themselves
than by preventing the same in their posterity.”—Bishop Berkeley, The Minute Philosopher, Dial. vii.§34.
“ An enormous sacrifice of time is made to the study of dead languages, and we ought to reap from them
a great and proportionate advantage.”—Rev. W. Sewell, M.A., “ Essay on the Cultivation of the Intellect
by the Study of Dead Languages.” Lond. 1820. p. 297.
“ I think that, from some cause or other, the success of the work has not been in proportion to the
pains bestowed upon it.”—Rev. E. Balston, Head-Master of Eton School, “ Report of Commissioners,”
vol. iii, p. 117.
SECOND EDITION.
LONDON:
W. AYLOTT & SON, 8, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1864.
Price Sixpence.
�" In this progressive country, we neglect all that knowledge in which there is progress, to devote
ourselves to those branches in which we are scarcely, if at all, superior to our ancestors. In this
practical country, the knowledge of all that gives power over nature, is left to be picked up by chance on
a man’s way through life. In this religious country, the knowledge of God’s works forms no part of
the education of the people,—no part even of the accomplishments of a gentleman.”—Lord Ashburton,
Speech at a Meeting of Schoolmasters at Winchester, 16th Dec., 1853.
"It is a most important truth, and one which requires, at this day, to be most earnestly enforced,
that it is by the study of facts, whether relating to nature or to man, and not by any pretended cultiva
tion of the mind by poetry, oratory, and moral or critical dissertations, that the understandings of
mankind in general will be most improved, and their views of things rendered most accurate.”—Dr.
Arnold, in Thompson's “Hist, of Rom. Lit.” 1852. p. 379. (Encycl. Metrop)
" It . would indeed be wonderful if a study of the poet’s lines were of more value than the study of
those things that inspired them: and if the words of men had in them more spiritual nourishment than
the works of the Creator.”—Prof. Jas. Nicol, “ On the Study of Nat. Hist.” 1853. p. 30.
..." 0 necessario confessare che piil presto sia degno il subbietto che la lingua; perchO il subbietto
0 fine, e la lingua 0 mezzo.”—Lorenzo de’ Medici.
" For one man who is fitted for the study of words, fifty are fitted for the study of things, and were
intended to have a perpetual, simple, and religious delight in watching the processes, or admiring the
creatures, of the natural universe. Deprived of this source of pleasure, nothing is left to them but
ambition or dissipation; and the vices of the upper classes of Europe are, I believe, chiefly to be attributed
to this single cause.”—John Ruskin.
“ Our present system, on account of the preposterous manner in which it attempts, to exalt the old
learning, is a direct cause of its being unjustly neglected, decried, and undervalued.”—Rev. F. B. Zincke,
“ School of the Future.” 1852. p. 78.
“ When I considered the former days of my youth, and the years of affliction, which had been many;
when I was driven on circularly in Latin bondage, as a horse in a mill, continually moving, but making
no progress; or, as a Jonas in tne whale’s belly, making long voyages, but seeing nothing about me, ana
often threatened by hard task-masters, who made me serve with rigour; I did, in compliance with
the dictates of reason, and with my own inclinations, resolve that this boy should, from those mis
fortunes, reap some advantage, and gain some knowledge, by (what I apprehended to be) the mistakes
and blunders of other men.”—J. T. Phillips, Preceptor to his R. H. Prince William, Duke of Cumber
land, “ A Compendious Way of Teaching Ancient and Modern Languages'' &c. 3rd Ed. 1728. p. 57.
“ Je croyais avoir d6ja donnd assez de temps aux langues, et m6me aussi it la lecture des livres
anciens, et i leurs histoires, et h leurs fables; car c’est quasi le m6me de converser avec ceux des aut.res
siOcles que de voyager. Il est bon de savoir quelque chose des moeurs des divers peuples, afin de juger
des ndtres plus sainiement.......... Mais lorsqu’on emploie trop de temps h voyager, on devient enfin
stranger en son pays; et lorsqu’on est trop curieux des choses qui se pratiquaient aux siCcles passes, on
demeure fort ignorant de celles qui se pratiquent en celui-ci.”—Descartes, “ Discours de la Methode.”
1637. (Alas! more than 200 years ago!)
“ Il semble que nous devons accommoder nos dtudes fi l’dtat present de nos moeurs, et dtudier les
choses qui sont a’usage dans le monde, puisqu’on ne peut changer cet usage pour l’accommoder h l’ordre
de nos etudes.”—L’Abbe Fleury, “ Traite du Choix des Etudes.” 1685.
" Is it not more probable that the proper and legitimate means of training the intellect co-existed
with the intellect itself, not since the period of the rise and fall of the Greek and Roman empires, but
since the beginning of the world ?”—Angus Macpherson, “ English Education.” Glasgow. 1854.
"Am I wrong in believing that the tendencies of the age are in favour of decreasing, rather than in
creasing, the amount of time bestowed upon classical scholarship P”—Dr. R. G. Latham, “ On the Study
of Language.” 1855. p. 112.
“ The father of Montaigne has observed that the tedious time which we moderns employ in acquiring
the language of the ancient Greeks and Romans, which cost them nothing, is the principal reason why
we cannot arrive at that grandeur of soul and perfection of knowledge that was in them.... The ac
quirements of science may be termed the armour of the mind; but that armour would be worse than
useless, that cost us all we had, and left us nothing to defend.”—Rev. C. Colton, “ Latonf &c.
�ON THE
REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON
PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
The sight of this Report, in four bulky
volumes, which weigh above ten pounds
avoirdupois, may well serve instead of
preface. Its contents are far too ample
and too various to allow me to do more
than call attention to one of its many
aspects; and even so, all our time will be
too short. The Commission included in
its scope the nine following schools:—
Eton, Winchester, Westminster, the
Charterhouse, St. Paul’s, Merchant Tay
lors’, Harrow, Rugby, and Shrewsbury.
The inquiry was divided into three
parts :—“ The first relating to the pro
perty and income of the several schools;
the second, to the administration and
management of them; the third, to the
system and course of study pursued in
them, to the religious and moral training
of the boys, their discipline, and general
education.” (p. 1.) Of these three heads,
it is exclusively the third, and even that
by no means thoroughly, that I wish this
evening to treat; looking less to the reli
gious and moral training of the boys,
than to “ the system and course of study,”
and its ascertained results, especially in
that department of study which claims
the lion’s share of time and effort. My
comments may be best arranged under
three heads: 1st, The Report of the Com
missioners regarding results; 2nd, The
evidence on which it rests; 3rd, The re
commendations of the Commissioners.
It ought to be further explained, that,
besides the general Report and general
recommendations of the Commissioners,
there is given a full and elaborate Report
on each of the nine schools, with further
recommendations specially applicable to
each. I propose, however, to confine
myself entirely to the general Report and
general recommendations. It is impor
tant to bear this restriction in mind, be
cause it is difficult, perhaps impossible,
to avoid injustice in speaking collectively
of nine schools which differ from each
other in not a few respects. It may be
not unnatural, as it is certainly not un
common, to take, as the typical repre
sentative of all these schools, Eton, the
most richly endowed, the most nume
rously attended, the most aristocratic
(though also the most backward and in
efficient) of them all. But much that is
true of the plethoric Eton may be very
far from true, say, of the more sparedieted Shrewsbury, the eminence of
which, in spite of difficulties, is an in
structive fact. At the same time, any
B
�4
such unintentional and inevitable injus
tice belongs rather to the Commissioners
than to me. It is on them and their
authorities that I almost exclusively rely.
I. The Times (of 28th March, 1864) thus
condenses the Commissioners’ Report on
the actual working of the present system,
so far as relates to our present purpose;
and this resume will probably be accepted
as less prejudiced, and so more trust
worthy, than any that I could make.
“ In one word, we may say that they find
it to be a failure—a failure even if tested
by those better specimens, not exceeding one
third of the whole, who go up to the Univer
sities. Though a very large number of these
have literally nothing to show for the results
of their school-hours from childhood to man
hood, but a knowledge of Latin and Greek,
with a little English and arithmetic, we have
here the strongest testimony that their know
ledge of the former is most inaccurate, and
their knowledge of the latter contemptible.
A great deal is taught under these two heads,
but very little is learned under either. A
small proportion become brilliant composers
and finished scholars, if they do not manage
to pick up a good deal of information for
themselves; but the great multitude cannot
construe an easy author at sight, or write
Latin prose without glaring mistakes, or
answer simple questions in grammar, or get
through a problem in the first two books of
Euclid, or apply the higher rules of arith
metic. A great many, amounting to about a
third at Christ Church, and a fifth at Exeter
College, fail to pass the common Matricula
tion Examination. Not less than a fourth
are plucked for their Little-go, a most ele
mentary examination in the very subjects
which we have just mentioned; and of the
rest many are only enabled to pass by the
desperate exertions of College Tutors and
‘ coaches.’ We need not follow this class of
public school men through the remainder of
their University career, since the duty of
teaching has then devolved upon others; but
for their shortcomings at entrance the schools
are mainly responsible. Most of them, says
an Oxford tutor of great experience and
*
judgment, ‘are persons who were allowed
as boys to carry their idleness with them
from form to form, to work below their
powers, and merely to move with the crowd;
they are men of whom something might have
been made, but now it is too late ; they are
grossly ignorant, and have contracted slovenly
habits of mind.’”*
A few citations from the Report itself
will serve to test the general accuracy of
the resume just given. The Commis
sioners say (vol. i. p. 26):—
“From the evidence the following con
clusions appear to follow:—That boys who
ha/ve capacity and industry enough to work for
distinction, are, on the whole, well taught in
the article o£ classical scholarship, at the
public schools; but that they occasionally
show a want of accuracy in elementary
knowledge, either from not having been well
grounded, or from having been suffered to
forget what they have learned; that the
average of classical knowledge among young
men leaving school for college is low; that in
arithmetic and mathematics, in general in
formation, and in English,f the average is
lower still, but is improving; that of the time
spent at school by the generality of boys,
much is absolutely thrown away as regards
intellectual progress, either from ineffective
teaching, from the continued teaching of
subjects in which they cannot advance, or
from idleness, or from a combination of these
causes ; that in arithmetic and mathematics
the public schools are specially defective, and
that this observation is not confined to any
particular class of boys. It is impossible to
misapprehend the effect which this state of
things produces, and must produce, on the
studies of the Universities. In the case of
those who do not read for honours, at all
events, the work of the first two years is
simply school-work—work proper for the
upper forms of a large school. The usual
age of matriculation at Oxford (no record is
kept at Cambridge) is between 18 and 19.
* “ The system (of public schools) has pro
duced men most remarkable for their great public
utility and eminence; but on the other hand it
appears that after spending a great many years in
these educational institutions, the large mass come
out with a great knowledge of cricket, and a very
good knowledge of rowing, with only that sort of
Latin and Greek which is perfectly useless in after
life, and entirely destitute of mathematical, scien
tific elementary truth, a knowledge of history and
their own country, which it must be admitted are
desirable, if possible, to attain.’’—Earl Gran
ville, Chancellor of the University of London.
{Times, 12th May, 1864.)
t It must never be forgotten that one main ob
ject for which boys learn the dead languages is to
teach them to use their own. (Report, vol. i. p. 15.)
“The composition of Greek prose and Greek
verse is a poor substitute for the faculty of trans
lating such authors as Pindar and Thucydides flu
ently into elegant English.”—Rev. C. W. Sand
ford, M.A., Senior Censor of Christ Church,
* The Rev. James Riddell, Fellow and Tutor Master of Rugby from 1841 to 1847 ; in Report,
vol. ii. p. 11. 1864.
of Balliol College.
�5
Of 430 who matriculated in 1862, only 22, or
5 per cent., were below 18 years of age; while
209, or 49 per cent., had attained the age of
19. It follows that, with a great mass of
men, school education—and that education
one which barely enables them at last to con
strue a Latin and Greek book, poet and
orator, chosen by themselves, to master three
books of Euclid, and solve a problem in
quadratic equations—is prolonged to the age
of 20 or 21.”* (p. 24.)
“ Natural science, with such slight excep
tions as have been noticed, is practically ex
cluded from the education of the higher
classes in England. Education is, in this
respect, narrower than it was three centuries
ago; whilst science has prodigiously ex
tended her empire, has explored immense
tracts, divided them into provinces, intro
duced into them order and method, and made
them accessible to all. This exclusion is, in
our view, a plain defect and a great practical
evil. It narrows unduly and injuriously the
mental training of the young, and the know
ledge, interests, and pursuits of men in maturer life. Of the large number of men who
have little aptitude or taste for literature,
there are many who have an aptitude for
science, especially for science which deals,
not with abstractions, but with external and
sensible objects; how many such there are
can never be known, as long as the only edu
cation given at schools is purely literary ; but
that such cases are not rare or exceptional,
can hardly be doubted by any one who has
observed either boys or men. Nor would it
answer, were it true, to say that such persons
are sure to find their vocation, sooner or later.
But this is not true. We believe that many
pass through life without useful employment,
and without the wholesome interest of a
favourite study, for want of an early intro
duction to. one for which they are really fit.
It is not, however, for such cases only, that
an early introduction to natural science is
desirable. It is desirable surely, though not
necessary, for all educated men. Its value as
a means of opening the mind and disciplining
the faculties, is recognised by all who have
taken the trouble to acquire it, whether men
of business or of leisure. It quickens and
cultivates directly the faculty of observation,
which in very many persons lies almost
dormant through life, the power of accurate
and rapid generalisation, and the mental
habit of method and arrangement; it accus
toms young persons to trace the sequence of
* It is “beyond doubt that not one of these
nine schools sends as many as half of its boys to
the Universities, and that in the case of most of
them the proportion is much less than one-third.
These proportions should be borne in mind in
considering the fitness of the system of instruction
at these schools for the end in view.” (p. 27.)
cause and effect; it familiarises them with a
kind of reasoning which interests them, and
which they can promptly comprehend; and
it is, perhaps, the best corrective for that in
dolence which is the vice of half-awakened
minds, and which shrinks from any exertion
that is not, like an effort of memory, merely
mechanical. With sincere respect for the
opinions of the eminent schoolmasters who
differ from us in this matter, we are con
vinced that the introduction of the elements
of natural science into the regular course of
study is desirable, and we see no sufficient
reason to doubt that it is practicable.” (p. 32.)
The length of this citation will, I trust,
be justified by its almost inestimable im
portance. It exposes one of the most
striking omissions in ordinary school
teaching, especially of the richer classes—
an omission which not only is greatly to
be deplored on its own account, but
which goes far to frustrate the attempt
to teach even what is included. Vainly
can it be affirmed that natural science is
already taught in many of these schools.
It may figure in programmes; it may be
made the subject of an occasional lecture
during, probably, the intervals of time
assigned to play; but that it is systemati
cally taught, as other subjects are, and as
it must be if any good is to be effected, is
quite unproved. Better that it should
*
not be taught at all, than that it should
be so taught as to furnish an argument
against its admission into schools on a
reasonable footing.
“ It is clear that there are many boys
whose education can hardly be said to have
* Viscount Boringdon, when examined regard
ing Eton, thus replies:—“Lord Clarendon:—
‘ Natural science is, I believe, wholly unattended
to ?’—‘ Entirely.’ ‘ Occasionally there are lec
tures given ; a lecturer comes down from London,
and lectures on natural science ?’—‘ Yes.’ ‘ Are
they much attended to ?’—‘ Yes ; they are a good
deal attended to; it is with boys who have nothing
to do in the evening; once a week, boys, who have
nothing to do in the evenings, go there, but I do
not think they attend much to them; a certain
number do, but I think that most come a great
deal for making a row.’ ‘ Are the lectures gene
rally of a popular kind? are they good lectures ?’
—‘ Yes.’ ‘ Lecturers entitled to command atten
tion, which they do not get?’—‘ Certainly.’ ” (Vol.
iii. p. 257.) After this, can anything be more evi
dent than that physical science cannot be taught in
schools 1
B2
�6
begun till they enter, at the age of twelve or
thirteen, or even later, a school containing
several hundreds, where there can be com
paratively little of that individual teaching
which a very backward boy requires.” (p. 40.)
At first sight, this evil may seem to be
chargeable, not on the public schools, but
on the preparatory schools, or on the
parents, with whom the Commissioners
“ do not hesitate to say that the fault
chiefly rests.” But a strict entrance
examination, such as the Commissioners
themselves recommend, and such as it is
the duty, as well as the right and the
interest (rightly viewed) of the public
schools to institute, would very speedily
abate this grievance, which now aggra
vates, much more than it excuses, their
inefficiency.
.
It is the office of education,” say
the Commissioners, (p. 30,) “ not only to dis
cipline some of the faculties, but to awaken,
call out, and exercise them all, so far as this
can be usefully done, in boyhood ; to awaken
tastes that may be developed in after life; to
impart early habits of reading, thought, and
observation; and to furnish the mind with
such knowledge as is wanted at the outset of
life. A young man is not well educated—
and, indeed, not educated at all—who cannot
reason, or observe, or express himself easily
and correctly, and who is unable to bear his
part in cultivated society, from ignorance of
things which all who mix in it are assumed
to be acquainted with. He is not well edu
cated if all his information is shut up within
one narrow circle, and he has not been
taught, at least, that beyond what he has been
able to acquire lie great and varied fields of
knowledge, some of which he may afterwards
explore, if he has inclination and opportunity
to do so. The kind of knowledge which is
necessary or useful, and the best way of
exercising and disciplining the faculties (?),
must vary, of course, with the habits and re
quirements of the age and society in which his
life is to be spent.............. Hence, no system of
instruction can be framed which will not re
quire modification from time to time. The
highest and most useful office of education is
certainly to train and discipline; but it is
not the only office. And we cannot but re
mark that, whilst in the busy world too great
a value perhaps is sometimes set upon the
actual acquisition of knowledge, and too little
upon that mental discipline which enables
men to acquire and turn it to the best ac
count, there is also a tendency, which is the
very reverse of this, and which is among the
besetting temptations of the ablest school
masters ; and that if very superficial men may
be prodmeed by one of these infi/uences, very
ignorant men are sometimes produced by the
other.” (p. 30.)
“ If a youth, after four or five years spent
at school, quits it at 19, unable to construe an
easy bit of Latin or Greek without the help
of a Dictionary, or to write Latin grammati
cally, almost ignorant of geography and of
the history of his own country, unacquainted
with any modern language but his own, and
hardly competent to write English correctly,
to do a simple sum, or stumble through an
easy proposition of Euclid, a total stranger to
the laws which govern the physical world,
and to its structure, with an eye and hand
unpractised in drawing, and without knowing
a note of music, with an uncultivated mind,
and no taste for reading or observation, his
intellectual education must certainly be ac
counted a failure, though there may be no
fault to find with his principles, character, or
manners. We by no means intend to repre
sent this as a type of the ordinary product of
English public-school education; but speak
ing both from the evidence we have received
and from opportunities of observation open
to all, we must say that it is a type much
more common than it ought to be, making
ample allowance for the difficulties before re
ferred to, and that the proportion of failures
is, therefore, unduly large.......... The school
has absolute possession of the boy during four
or five years, the most valuable years of pupil
age, the time when the powers of apprehension
and memory are brightest, when the faculty
of observation is quick and lively, and he is
forming his acquaintance with the various
objects of knowledge. Something, surely,
may be done during that time in the way, not
of training alone, but of positive acquisition,
and the school is responsible for turning it to
the best account.” (p. 31.)
These passages may, and indeed must,
suffice to indicate the point of view from
which the Commissioners regard these
schools, the standard by which they try
their results, and the degree in which
their expectations have been fulfilled or
disappointed.
Before we proceed to cite a small part
of the evidence in support of these very
grave strictures, let me remind you, first,
that the Commissioners are not the ene
mies, but the friends, of the public-school
system—most of them, if not all, having
been themselves brought up under one or
other of its forms,—and that their purpose
is to amend, not to destroy; 2ndly, that
�these institutions are, for the most part,
richly endowed, venerable from their
antiquity and the associations with indi
vidual greatness which cling to their
very stones, and amply represented in
both houses of the Legislature, as in all
the upper walks of social life I 3rdly, that
their intimate connexion with the Church
renders them in reality a branch of the
great ecclesiastical organization of the
country; 4thly, that they are superin
tended, in the main, by the ablest and
most accomplished men whom, within
the limits of the Church, it is possible to
find; that the masters are, in general,
handsomely paid, and not unfrequently
exchange the ferule for the crozier, and
still more frequently retire from the tur
moil of the schoolroom to some not un
dignified church-living. The concur
rence of all these circumstances ought
surely to favour the development and
diffusion of the highest and widest cul
ture, if only the wit and the will existed,—
the wit to know in what true education
consists, and the will to carry this know
ledge into practical effect. Terribly deepseated must the evil be which goes so far
to, neutralize all these seemingly great
advantages, and to make the results of all
this vast mechanism so miserably meagre,'
on the admission of even its best friends!
II. The evidence on which the Com
missioners base their conclusions is too
extensive to permit, and too uniform to
require, many extracts here. The Rev.
C. W. Sandford, M.A., Senior Censor of
Christ Church, Oxford, thus writes:—
“ The head boys come well prepared from
school. The standard in our class examina
tions in classics is consequently high. This
is not affected by the state in which the
average boys come to the University. The
other studies may suffer in some degree...........
Some fifty or sixty young men matriculate at
Christ Church in the course of each year.
Of these perhaps ten will read for honours in
classics. Such men would be able to construe
with tolerable correctness a new passage from
any Latin or Greek author, translate a piece
of easy English prose into tolerable Latin,
and answer correctly simple grammatical
and etymological questions in Latin and
Greek. The other forty or fifty would not.
In fact, very few of those who are merely
candidates for matriculation can construe
with accuracy a piece from an author whom
they profess to have read. We never try
them in an unseen passage. It would be
useless to do so. They are usually examined
in Virg. JLn. I—V, and Homer, II. I—V.
But if they have not read Homer orVirgil, we
examine them in whatever authors they have
read last.... We do not test their knowledge
of ancient or modern history, or of geography,
at matriculation. We examine them in arith
metic, but not in Euclid or Algebra. Their
answers to the questions in arithmetic do not
encourage us to examine them in Euclid or
Algebra. We do not examine the candidates
in religious knowledge. But at the end of
every term the junior members of the house
are examined in some portion of the New
Testament. The answers written by the
mass of the men are not better than what we
might expect from the upper classes of our
parochial schools. Very few have that know
ledge of the Bible that a Christian gentleman
should have. Nor do many show a desire to
increase their knowledge. Of the 150 who
attend the divinity lectures, 20 will show that
they they have been well taught before en
tering the University.” (Vol. ii. pp. 10,11.)
The Rev. G. W. Sitchin, M.A., Junior
Censor of Christ Church, thus writes:—
“ The average men bring up but small re
sults of the training to which they have been
subjected for years. There is a general want
of accuracy in their work; even the rudi
mentary knowledge of grammar and Latin
prose writing is far less than it ought to be.
I fear that the elementary schools send the
little boys up to the public schools in a very
unprepared state, and that the public schools,
to a great extent, assume that the boys are
fairly grounded; which is not the case. The
only subjects which are professed at school,
and do not form part of our system of work,
are such rudimentary matters as English
composition, spelling, arithmetic, &c. In
these there seems to be considerable defi
ciency. The University course of teaching
is much hampered by the crude state of the
men subjected to it, and by the necessity of
supplementing the shortcomings of school
education. Our system becomes, for average
men, both narrow and vague. We feel that
the most we can do for men who come up de
ficient in knowledge of grammar, history,
language, &c., is to provide something for
them to do; the time for real progress seems,
in many cases, to be absolutely past. Men
whose abilities lead them towards other than
classical studies are much hindered from
their proper pursuits, and sometimes stopped
altogether, by that want of early accurate
�8
training, which shows itself at every step we
take in educating our men. Consequently,
it appears to me that the University is obliged
to spend much of her energies on matters
which do not belong to her. If one is of
opinion that eight to ten years spent chiefly
on the elements of Latin and Greek ought to
have been enough to secure a fair knowledge
of grammar, then one cannot help regretting
the weight which presses on us. But I am
aware that many think otherwise, consider
such a repetition of rudiments a good, and
call it a general education. As a matter of
fact, a couple of plays of Euripides, a little
Virgil, two books of Euclid, or the like, form
the occupation of a large part of our men
during their first university year; and I can
not consider this a satisfactory state of things,
especially as not a few fail in passing their
examination in these subjects. It should be
remembered that the best men, who go in for
scholarships, are taken without the ordinary
matriculation examination.... Of the ordinary
men, a quarter might possibly steer their way
through an unseen passage in Greek with
fair success. Bather a larger number might
manage an ordinary piece of Latin. Tolerable
Latin prose is very rare. Perhaps one piece
in four is free from bad blunders. A good
style is scarcely ever seen. The answers we
get to simple grammatical questions are very
inaccurate. In arithmetic they have im
proved, as it is now understood that they
cannot pass responsions without it. With a
matriculation examination, whose standard is
very low, and solely intended to prove that
men have a fair chance of afterwards passing
responsions, and with every wish to admit
men, we have still been obliged this year to
reject about one-third of the whole number
who have presented themselves. As to
average men, their exact knowledge of gram
mar, &c., is now tested by us ; whereas,
a few years ago, it was almost taken for
granted. This makes me diffident in express
ing an opinion about its improvement or
decay. On the whole, I am inclined to think
it has gone backwards, for I can easily ima
gine it better; it would be hard to conceive
it much worse.... We have a vast number of
young men from the upper forms of the
public schools, especially from Eton. On the
whole, their conduct is very satisfactory, and
I can imagine no men more pleasant to deal
with, had they had fair-play in respect of
their learning. As it is, they come to us
with very unawakened minds, and habits of
mental indolence and inaccuracy.” (Vol. ii.
pp. 11—13.)
“ I think that the education given at the
schools does not sufficiently prepare boys for
the University course. The boys are not
well grounded in the subjects to which most
of their time has been given, and on other
points less strictly academical their ignorance
is sometimes surprising. In fact, I am sorry
to say that many boys come to the University
from school knowing next to nothing. These
general remarks, of course, admit of very
many exceptions, as regards both schools and
individuals. The University course is much
affected by the ill-prepared state in which
the majority of the students come; and
instead of making progress, a few years ago
the University had to make its course com
mence with more elementary teaching, and
to insist on the rudiments of arithmetic, and
a more precise acquaintance with the ele
ments of grammar. Tutors felt that it was
degrading to both themselves and the Uni
versity to descend to such preliminary in
struction; but the necessity of the case
compelled them. Had reading and spelling
been included in the reforms of that day, it
would have been not without benefit to many
members of the University. I have some
times had to remind my brother examiners
and myself in the final examination for B.A.,
that we were not at liberty to pluck for bad
spelling, bad English, or worse writing. If
more of such elementary teaching were done
at school, the University course might be
both deepened and widened. Hitherto it has
seemed useless for the University to enlarge
her course to suit the tastes of men whose
minds have never been formed at all by any
methodical teaching, and who really cannot
be said to have any tastes.... It is difficult to
say what proportion of candidates for ma
triculation can translate a new passage of a
Latin or Greek author. At my own college
we consider such a test much too severe, the
college would be left half empty if it were
insisted on. The usual plan is to select a
passage from some book which they have
recently read. Perhaps eight out of twenty
candidates could translate a passage from an
easy author. (Of course I am speaking of
the ordinary students, not of candidates for
scholarships.) Rather more than this pro
portion, perhaps twelve out of twenty, would
write a piece of tolerable Latin prose, and do
a fair grammar paper. Of arithmetic and
mathematics few of them know anything
more than the amount insisted on by the
University, and many of them barely that;
the extent of their knowledge does not reach
beyond vulgar fractions and decimals. And
here I think that the schools are greatly to
be blamed.” (Vol. ii. pp. 16, 17.)
The Rev. W. Hedley, M.A., lately
The Rev. D. P. Chase, M.A., Principal
Fellow and Tutor of University College,
Oxford, and Public Examiner, thus of St. Mary Hall, and Tutor of Oriel
Collesze. thus writes:—
�9
“In my opinion, the previous education
given to those who enter the University does
not fulfil satisfactorily the purpose of ground
ing in the classical studies which they are
required to pursue. The result is, that the
minimum of attainment necessary for the
B.A. degree is far below what it might and
ought to be; while the difficulty which the
majority of passmen have in producing even
that minimum necessarily restricts and
narrows the course. Much of the teaching
given at the University is such as ought to
have been given at school. This, while it
tends to weary and disgust those who have
been better taught, precludes any higher
teaching of those who must be kept to school
boy work. ... I think that public-school boys,
when they are good, are better than any
others. They have a readiness in producing
what they know, and a polish in their pro
ductions, which are rarely found in others.
When they are bad, they are very bad. This
seems to me to prove that the public schools
have the power of giving the very best in
struction, while their circumstances are in
themselves an education; that all boys have
there an opportunity of being well taught,
but that on no boy is imposed the necessity
of learning.” (Vol. ii. pp. 17,18.)
preparation for the University course shown
by candidates for an ordinary matriculation,
that I am convinced either that the system of
teaching at the schools is radically faulty, or
(what is more probable) that little more can
be done in the matter of Latin and Greek
than is done, and that therefore some new
direction should be given to the studies
pursued in schools.” (Vol. ii. p. 20.)
The Rev. Arthur Faber, M.A., Fellow
and Tutor of New College, thinks that
“in scholarship and mathematics the
public school system has a marked supe
riority over that of other schools;” and
that while “ the standard is undoubtedly
a low one, and might be raised with
advantage to the University, public school
education tends to qualify for a University
residence the great majority of boys.”
(Vol. ii. p. 21.)
The Rev. Bartholomew Price, M.A.,
Fellow of Pembroke College, and Sadlerian Professor of Natural Philosophy,
speaking “of mathematical instruction
The Rev. Henry Furneaux, M.A., and attainments in Oxford, so far as
Fellow and Tutor of Corpus Christi Oxford and the public schools act on each
College, thus writes:—
other,” thus writes:—
“ It may be fairly maintained, that the
schools from which the University is fed
either have not sufficiently grounded in
classics and mathematics a large number of
those whom they send us, or, as is very
commonly the case, have allowed them to
forget in the higher forms the groundwork
which was taught in the lower.” (Vol. ii.
p. 19.)
“I do observe a very marked difference
between young men coming to this University
from the great public schools, and from other
schools or from private tutors, as to their
mathematical attainments. The young men
from public schools are far worse prepared.
Whatever time they may have given to the
subject, it does not appear to me that they
have given that study and attention to it
The Rev. J. R. T. Eaton, Fellow and which has generally been so profitably be
stowed elsewhere.
Tutor of Merton College, thus writes:— the young men to be Assuming the ability of
equal, not only do I find
“ It has long been held among college tutors the attainments of those from other schools
that the late age (18—19) up to which young to be greater, but I find them to be better
men are retained at our public schools, grounded and to have learned the elements
before quitting them for the Universities, is more thoroughly and more carefully. Seldom
counterbalanced by no corresponding increase do I meet with young men from the public
in the amount of knowledge gained. In this, schools who know more than the bare ele
as in other points, the many are sacrificed to ments of mathematics; whereas others have
the few. While a really persevering and gone through a sound course of geometry,
intelligent youth is gaining fresh stores of which I take to be a most excellent dis
information, improving his powers of taste ciplinary exercise, and have often well studied
and composition, and grounding himself in the principles of the modern analytical
his knowledge with a view to competing for methods. This is frequently the case with
scholarships at the University, the bulk of young men who come from the Universities
young men at a public school are going back, sflid schools of Scotland, and from schools in
not progressing. They have reached an age England of the class just below the large
when the stricter discipline fitted to boys is public schools. . . . The junior scholarship has
losing its hold; they have no adequate motive never been gained by a young man from the
to engage their diligence. . . . On the whole,! great public schools. ... I cannot say that
I am so little satisfied with the amount of the knowledge of the young men who come
�to this University as ordinary Btudents
appears to me such as it might and ought to
be. Frequently arithmetic, one or two books
of Euclid, and a little algebra, usually no
farther than simple equations, is all that they
profess to have learned, and this amount is
generally known very imperfectly. During
the last four years I have become acquainted,
through the Oxford local examinations, with
the standard of knowledge of those subjects
possessed by boys belonging to the middle
class schools; and I find it, for extent and
accuracy, far superior to that which is ex
hibited by the candidates for matriculation
from public schools who come under my
notice. These latter can in many cases
scarcely apply the rules of arithmetic, and
generally egregiously fail in questions which
require a little independent thought and
common sense.”
The evidence from Cambridge, while less
extensive, is on the whole less strongly
conclusive than that from Oxford against
the public school system.
The Rev. J. B. Mayor, M.A., Fellow
and Tutor of St. John’s College, thus
writes:—
for a ' pass’ is lowered, in consequence of the
numbers who fail to answer a fair proportion
of the questions proposed to them. For 18
years I have found employment in Cambridge
in supplementing, as a private tutor, the de
ficiencies of school education, and in teaching
the simplest rudiments of arithmetic, algebra,
and elementary mathematics, and in pre
paring in Latin and Greek candidates for the
previous examination and ordinary degree...
The greater part of my pupils are from
public schools, and I cannot but think that I
have to teach them nothing but what they
ought to have been thoroughly taught at
school. ... There is at Cambridge no matricu
lation examination except at Trinity College,
and there the Greek and Latin subjects are
fixed, and Latin prose composition is not re
quired ; yet I may call attention to the fact
that, for the last two years, rather more than
one-third of those who entered at Trinity
failed at the first entrance examination. With
regard to arithmetic, I can testify, from my
own experience, to the almost universal
ignorance of the simplest first principles of
the subject, and may state that at the pre
vious examination in October, 1862, there
were 86 decided failures in arithmetic and
algebra out of 260 candidates; while in the
examination for the ordinary degree in June,
1862, one examiner found in the translations
from the Greek author mistakes in spelling
in the papers of 91 candidates out of 161.
I think in Greek and Latin I find public
school boys generally more fluent, and as su
perficial as boys educated elsewhere, but
worse prepared in arithmetic and elementary
mathematics.” (Vol. ii. p. 30.)
“I think that the standard of University
teaching and of the University degree is
much lower than it should be, partly in con
sequence of the ignorance and backwardness
of the men who come to us from the schools.
.... My impression, after some years’ ex
perience as a lecturer and tutor at one of the
largest colleges of the University, is that not
more than two-thirds of those who come up
The last witness whom I shall cite is
for matriculation could construe an easy
passage from a Latin author, and not more the Very Rev. H. G. Liddell, who was
than one-third an easy passage from a Greek for nine years Head Master of West
author, which they had not seen before.
Probably about -the same proportion might be minster School, and who has been for
able to translate into Latin, and answer easy seven years (since 1855) Dean of Christ
philological questions. . . . My impression is Church, Oxford. Being examined by the
that more is known of ancient than of modern
history; but the majority are very ignorant Commissioners, he says:—
“ I think those boys are generally better
of both, as well as of geography.” (Vol. ii.
prepared who come from less fashionable
p.26.)
The large majority
The Rev. W. H. Girdleston, M.A., schools.... get from the great of the average
of boys I
public schools
Christ’s College, thus writes :—
are from Eton. I think the temptations to
“ I consider that the education generally idleness that exist there are greater than in
given at schools does not give a satisfactory other schools, and I suppose that is the
grounding in those subjects which form the reason of their being less well prepared.”
especial studies of this University, and that
Being asked, “ in regard to the average
the large majority of young men who enter number of public schools, what would be
into college show a very superficial knowledge
of Latin and Greek; while of English litera the qualifications of the boys; for in
ture, English history, and English composition, stance, can they write Latin, not ele
they are deplorably ignorant. ... It is a con gantly, but correctly, without gram
stant complaint of our University examiners,
that the mass of men are very badly ground matical mistakes P” he answers, “ No,
ed ; and often the standard of marks required generally not.”
The examiner, Mr.
�11
Vaughan, having said, “I need hardly
ask you whether they can write Greek
correctly ? ” Mr. Liddell answers, “ I
never tried them in Greek at the ma
triculation examination.” Being asked,
“ Can they, if a Greek author is put into
their hands, and they are allowed to read
it once over, construe a passage which,
does not contain words of very rare occur
rence, and no sentence of a very intricate
character P” he says:—
“‘I can best answer that question by
stating that in practice we are obliged to1
restrict ourselves to books that have been
prepared. I do not think we should get even
a tolerable translation of a book which they
had not read before.’... ‘ Not of any pas
sage ?’—‘ If you pointed out an easy passage
from Xenophon, in which there was not the
slightest difficulty, perhaps you might; but
you would have to select your passage with
great care; you could not open the book at
random and ask them to read a Greek pas
sage. We do not get it well done even in the
books that are prepared in a great many
cases. I am speaking of those who come up
merely to be matriculated — the average
boys.’... ‘ Now, I have asked you generally
with regard to the public schools. With
respect to Eton, can you tell what is the state
of classical attainments there ?’ .... ‘ With
these average boys it is very much what I
have stated. Their Latin prose is certainly
not elegant or scholarlike. It is exceedingly
bad. Even those boys who can construe
pretty fluently, when you come to probe
them in grammar, often fail to give satis
factory answers. They often fail even when
the question is put upon paper, and they have
plenty of time to think. Many of them bring
up the words misspelt in the grossest man
ner.’ ” (Vol. iii., p. 400.)
*
The evidence now quoted suggests
several reflections, of which I venture to
present a few in brief.
1st. Seeing that, in the main, “ clas* The case is not better in France. “ Il n’est
presque pas de jour qui n’apporte son temoignage
de la decadence des humanites scolaires chez vous.
L’autre semaine, je fus a la Sorbonne recommander
un candidat qui se presentait pour la deuxieme
fois aux epreuves du baccalaureat. Disant qu’aux
premieres epreuves sa version avait ete ‘ bonne,’
je fus vivement interrompu par le venerable examinateur: ‘ Dites passable,’ s’ecria-t-il; ‘jamais
nous n’en voyons une bonne 1 Et cependant cette
version est la deux-millieme environ que le candi
dat a mise sur le papier depuis le commencement
de ses etudes!’—Fred. Diibner, Reforme, life.
1862. p. 3.
sics” and mathematics, and especially
classics, are taught in these schools to the
grievous neglect, partial or total, of all
other subjects which are important either
from their practical utility or from their
educational influence, it might have been
some consolation, if not some compen
sation, to find that classics at least were
well taught and commonly learned. But
no! For the sake of classics, all other
subjects are more or less neglected; yet
even these do not seem to profit by the
monopoly so largely assigned, and so vigi
lantly guarded. This discovery is most
lamentable, yet most instructive. Just
as, in economics, a “ protected” manu
facture is always sickly,—so in education,
monopoly is fatal to the subject it would
encourage. It is only just to add, that it
is not to the public schools only, though
mainly, that this stricture applies.
2nd. In the light of such disclosures as
these, we can better understand the as
sault lately made on the education of the
poor, so far as it depends on state agency,
and the too successful attempt to restrict
it virtually within limits not long ago
believed to be too narrow for even the
poorest of the poor. Very revolutionary
indeed must have been the continuance
of a scheme of primary instruction which
should make the children of the humbler
classes superior in real intelligence and
available acquirements to those of the
richer and higher classes. “ Payment
according to results” — a cry so mis
chievously potent to curtail the instruc
tion of the former—may, with far greater
reason, be commended to the attention
of those who conduct the instruction of
the latter.
*
* According to .the last Report of the National
Society, “ The effect of the Revised Code has
been to increase the demand for reading-books,
copy-books, and slates, while that for books on
history, geography, and all higher branches, has
considerably diminished.” At the last Annual
Meeting of the Society, the Archbishop of Canter
bury said:—“In order to meet the diminished
contributions, it has been found necessary to give
up the employment of many skilled teachers. The
result has been, that mental teaching has not been
�12
3rd. It is sadly striking that too com
monly the school instruction of the rich
seems to be expected to begin at the very
age at which that of the poor is expected
to end, or at even a later age. Com
plaints have long been rife of the diffi
culty of retaining poor children at school
beyond the age of 10,11, or, at furthest,
12. Yet it seems that 12, and even 13, is
the age virtually often assigned for the
commencement of the actual teaching of
the children of the rich. The very years
in which for the former all must be done,
are by the latter passed with nothing
done. Universities, condemned to mere
school work, throw the blame on the
schools, especially the public schools.
These schools pass on the charge to the
preparatory schools; and by these again
it is shifted to the parents, who, having
been themselves brought up in the old
school and college course, tread blindly
in the routine of custom. The vicious
circle is thus complete, and each party, if
even it desires a change, waits for the
so efficient as before. As to reading, writing, and
arithmetic, that has been in no way affected ; but
in regard to history, geography, and general infor
mation, the demand for that description of know
ledge has been diminished. He was, therefore,
afraid that less general information would be given
in the schools than before the new Code was esta
blished.” (limes, 8th June, 1864.) “Mr. M.
Arnold observed that the new method of examina
tion did not afford Inspectors the same means of
drawing out the children, and of ascertaining
really what they could do, that was afforded under
the old system; and when he (Mr. Walter) lately
had an opportunity of seeing a school inspection,
it struck him forcibly that that was the case. If
it were not a breach of confidence, he might add
that the Inspector was very much of the same
opinion, and observed to him, that under the new
system of examination it was impossible to get at
the intelligence of the children, to ask them ques
tions which would draw out their minds and prove
what they really understood, so well as under the
old system of inspection. The children were re
quired to read a certain number of lines, to do a
sum, and write a copy; but as to putting any
question which would test their general knowledge
and understanding, nothing of the kind was at
tempted ; and when he (Mr. Walter) suggested
that such a course of examination might as well
be attempted, the answer was that there was no
time for it, and that it would be impossible to get
through the work if that system were pursued.”—
Mr. Walter, M.P. for Berkshire. (Times, 1st
July, 1864.)
others to set it on foot. The institution,
by the great public schools, of a standard
of preliminary qualification, and a rigo
rous adherence to it, may abate this cry
ing evil; but its removal can be effected
only by a thorough remodelling of the
course of private instruction. So long as
children are left in ignorance of those
studies most congenial to their age, and
forced to acquire what is unsuitable to
their mental condition, so long must the
work of early teaching be irksome in its
operation and barren in its result.
4th. These disclosures of the real re
sults of public school teaching lead me to
view with some surprise a recent jeremiad
by a gentleman of high educational name,
on the incompetency and untrustworthi
ness of private schools, with slight, if any,
exception. Ifthere are any private schools
the results of whose teaching are as de
plorably unsatisfactory as those now pro
ved to attend public school teaching, it is
indeed time that they should be “im
proved off the face of the earth;” and
probably this consummation would long
ago have been attained, had the public
schools, the great educational exemplars
of the nation, not neglected their duty,
and wasted their mighty power. The
better and, I believe, the larger class of
private school teachers will assuredly
welcome as an auxiliary, not dread as an
opposing force, any improvements in the
great public schools. Their hands would
thus be strengthened, and their aspira
tions raised. Though their labours may
be more obscure than those of public
school masters, they are not less zealous;
to them also are the names of Arnold,
Kennedy, and Temple treasured watch
words, rich in encouragement and guid
ance. But even if names like these were
less exceptional than they are, they would
but strengthen the case against a system
which, in spite of these, has been so sig
nally found wanting.
5th. It must not be forgotten, that the
results, whether for good or for evil, of
�13
6th. The Commissioners, in their gene
which we have seen in part the evidence,
concern almost exclusively those of the ral conclusion, after saying of the course
pupils who go up to the Universities. of study,
Of even these, say the Commissioners,
“ which appears to us sound and valuable
“ those from the highest forms of these in its main elements, but wanting in breadth
and flexibility,—defects which, in our judg
schools, who are on the whole well taught ment, destroy in many cases, and impair in
classical scholars, notoriously form a all, its value as an education of the mind;
small proportion of the boys who receive and which are made more prominent at the
present time by the extension of knowledge
a public school education. The great in various directions, and by the multiplied
mass of such boys expose themselves to requirements of modern life,”—and of the
no tests which they can possibly avoid.” organization and teaching, regarded not as to
its range, but as to its force and efficacy,—
(Vol. i. p. 23.) But, as we have already I “ we have been unable to resist the conclu
seen, the Commissioners declare that sion, that these schools, in very different
only about one third of the pupils of the degrees, are too indulgent to idleness, or
struggle ineffectually with it; and that they
public schools, “taking them altogether,” consequently send out a large proportion of
go into the Universities. “Not one of men of idle habits and empty and unculti
these nine schools sends as many as half vated minds,”— go on to say,—“ Of their disci
moral training we have been
of its boys to the Universities; and in pline andterms of high praise.” (Vol. i. able to
speak in
p. 55.)
the case of most of them the proportion
This estimate, which it would be pre
is much less than one half.” (Vol. i.
sumptuous in me formally to contradict,
p. 27.) If such is the mental condition
*
I think it would be not less credulous to
of the one-third who have had before
accept. When I remember the applause
them what ought to be the stimulus of
which almost everywhere greeted, some
farther training at the University, what
years ago, the melancholy revelations of
is likely to be the mental condition of the
“ Tom Brown,” I am very distrustful of
remaining two-thirds, who, on their leav
the general notion of the morality, whe
ing school, enter at once on the business
ther possible or desirable, among school
of life, or oxi some course of professional
boys. In the absence of more direct
training, for which the teaching at the
means of judging, I note the indications,
public schools is still less likely to have
casually given in the Commissioners’
formed a fitting preparation ? The Com
Report, of the moral state of Eton, less
missioners regret that the test, which
casually of that of Westminster. I fix
they proposed to apply, of “ a direct and
my eye on the idleness and mental va
simple examination of a certain propor
cuity admitted to be too common, and I
tion of the boys,” was “ declined by the
rest in the conviction, that idleness is the
schools.” In the absence of such or any
fruitful parent of vice, and that the devil
equivalent test, we are left to an inference
dances not more surely in the empty
of probability. Few perhaps will main
pocket than in the empty head. It is not
tain that, leaving out of view the prize
wonderful that in a country where suc
winners at Oxford and Cambridge, it is
cessive generations of the leaders of opi
only the stupid and ignorant who con
nion have been subject to the public school
tinue their training at the Universities;
regime, such as it used to be, the general
or even that they are inferior to the ma
standard of morals by which youth are
jority who do not enter at the Univer
tried should be as low as is undoubtedly
sities. If the selected sample fail, what the general estimate of what is possible
shall we say of the sack ?
to be learned in school, still more of the
* At Christmas, 1861, the nine schools con
tained 2696 boys between 8 and 19 years of age,
the average being about 15. (Vol. i. p. 11.)
influence of judicious school-training on
character and conduct in after life. The
“ Tom Brown” code of school ethics often
�14
reminds me of the Irish father who said
that of all his sons he liked his youngest
best, “ because,” said he, “ he never kicks
me when I’m down.” It is scarcely more
exacting, or more difficult to please.
III. Time permits only a very brief
notice of the general recommendations of
the Commissioners. They are given un
der thirty-two heads, but many of them
are beyond our present scope.
“ (7) In the selection of the masters, the
field of choice should in no case be confined
to persons educated at the school. (8) The
classical languages and literature should con
tinue to hold the principal place in the course
of study. (9) In addition to the study of
classics and to religious teaching, every boy
should be taught arithmetic and mathe
matics ; one modern language at least, which
should be either French or German; some
one branch at least of natural science, and
either drawing or music. Care should be
taken to ensure that the boys acquire a good
general knowledge of geography and of an
cient history, some acquaintance with modern
*
history, **
and a command of pure gram
matical English. . . . (11) The teaching of
natural science should, wherever practicable,
include two main branches—1, chemistry
and physics; 2, comparative physiology and
natural history, both animal and vegetable.
. • . . (13) Arrangements should be made
for allowing boys, after arriving at a certain
place in the school, and upon the request of
their parents or guardians, to drop some
portion of their classical work (for example,
Latin verse and Greek composition), in order
to devote more time to mathematics, modern
languages, or natural science; or, on the
other hand, to discontinue wholly or in part
natural science, modern languages, or mathe
matics, in order to give more time to classics
or some other study. . . . (16) The promo
tion of the boys from one classical form to
another, and the places assigned to them in
such promotion, should depend upon their
* The difference between the phrases, “ a good
general knowledge of ancient history,” and “ some
acquaintance with modern history,” is equally
significant and strange.—W. B. H.
** Young people should learn the contemporary
history in which they live, and of which they are a
'part. Vicksburg is as important as Saguntum ;
to follow Forey from the coast to Puebla (and
learn why if'e lent) is as exciting as accompany
ing Cortez ; and to know something of the history
and the sayings and the doings of those who would
like to govern us, is at lenst as important for
our youth of either sex, as to learn the consti
tution of the Roman legislature.”—Athenceum,
20th June, 1863.
progress, not only in classics and divinity,
but also in arithmetic and mathematics; and
likewise, in the case of those boys who are
studying modern languages or natural sci
ence, on their progress in those subjects re
spectively. (17) The scale of marks should
be so framed as to give substantial weight
and encouragement to the non-classical stu
*
dies. ....
“ (23) Every boy should be required, be
fore admission to the school, to pass an en
trance examination, and to show himself well
grounded for his age in classics and arith
metic, and in the elements of French and
German. (24) No boy should be promoted
from one form to another, on ground of seni
ority, unless he has passed a satisfactory
examination in the work of the form into
which he is to be promoted. (25) No boy
should be suffered to remain in the school
who fails to make reasonable progress in it.
.... (32) The Head Master should be re
quired to make an annual report to the Go
vernors on the state of the school, and this
report should be printed.” (Vol. i. pp. 53
—55.)
Without attempting to criticise these
recommendations in detail, I may say
that, in their general spirit and tendency,
they are a worthy sequel of a Report
which, admirably written, bears traces
everywhere of anxious yet calm and
patient deliberation, clear and impartial
judgment, and earnest desire to conci
liate the claims of the present, if not the
future, with respect for the past; to re
pair, enlarge, and adapt the existing sys
tem, not to destroy it and build afresh
upon its ruins. No one interested in
education can fail to find in its almost
every page ample material for reflection.
* The following scheme for the distribution of
the school or class lessons in a week is suggested
as furnishing a comparative scale (p. 34) ;—
1. Classics, with History and Divinity . 11
2. Arithmetic and Mathematics ... 3
3. French or German
.............................. 2
4. Natural Science................................... 2
5. Music or Drawing................................... 2
School Lessons, taking about an hour each, 20
“ It is here assumed that the school lessons take
about an hour each, and that they will be such as
to demand for preparation in the case of classics
10 additional hours, and in those of modern lan
guages and natural science respectively, at least
two additional hours, in the course of the week;
and that composition will demand about five
hours.” (In all 37 hours per week, out of 144, not
reckoning Sunday; 107 remaining for sleep, meals,
and exercise—say 18, or three-fourths, per day.)
�15
Nevertheless, while I cheerfully admit
that these suggestions go as far in the
right direction as could fairly be expected,
with due regard to either the inevitable
prepossessions of the Commissioners, or
the great practical difficulties with which
inveterate custom and neglect have per
plexed the question, I am very far from
thinking that they go to the root of the
evil, or do more than facilitate future
changes far more extensive than any now
possible, or perhaps safe. Progress, to
be sure, must be gradual; and sudden
and sweeping revolution is only less to be
dreaded than total immobility or torpor.
It was not to be expected that the Com
missioners should raise the question,
which, in spite of many well meant at
tempts to extend to the middle and lower
classes what are called the benefits of
public school training, is gradually for
cing itself on the public mind—whether
the system of separating boys from their
homes, and herding them in large num
bers in barrack-monasteries, away from
the blessed influences of the family, be
indeed the true ideal of education; and
whether the evil which exists to a smaller
extent in private boarding schools be not
magnified and intensified in the great
public schools. A judicious provision for
an exceptional and unfortunate necessity
is widely different from the advocacy of a
system as in itself the best that can be
even desired. This is a grave question,
which I must here only indicate, without
stopping to discuss.
But there is another question, only
less important, which the Commissioners
have tried to settle, and which I cannot
pass over. I belong to a large and everincreasing class of persons who, by ob
servation, reflection, and experience, are
led to believe the present system of clas
sical teaching to be a superstition, a
blunder, and a failure. Historically ex
plicable as a necessity of a bygone age,
its continuance in our day seems to me a
mischievous anachronism. Animated by
a deep sense of the value of Roman and
Greek literature, and of the good which
its study might effect under a wiser and
more natural method of instruction, and
truly grateful for the benefit I have my
self derived from it—dearly purchased as
it has been—I am not to be deterred
or dissuaded from uttering convictions
which I have long and carefully matured.
It is in the interest of classical instruc
tion itself that I would speak. Hitherto
neither the languages nor the literatures
of Greece or Rome have been in any
worthy sense learned by any but a very
minute fraction of the great mass of boys
who have spent eight, ten, and more of
the most precious years of their lives in
the wearisome drudgery which ancestral
wisdom has decided to be the inseparable
accompaniment, and even the indispen
sable instrument, of this kind of learn
ing. Hitherto even the few, with rare
exceptions, know little, while the many
know nothing, of what they are seeming
to learn; the training, thus practically
null in respect of knowledge, has done,
and is doing, much to foster habits of
idleness, distate, and incapacity for men
tal exertion, obtuseness, and confusion of
mind; and lastly, while these subjects
are not learned, other subjects, more con
genial to youthful faculty and taste, as
well as more practically useful in after
life, and at the same time better fitted as
educational agents, are, for the sake of
these, not taught. “ If,” says the Times
(28th April, 1864), “ we had any reason
to believe that Latin and Greek had been
displaced by French, or geography, or
music, or the elements of natural science,
we might, at any rate, feel that we had
gained something in place of what we
had lost.” But no! Just as a great Ger
man philosopher is reported to have said
that only one man living understood his
system, and he didn’t; so boys learn only
Latin and Greek, and these they do not
learn. Yet singular, almost incredible
is the indifferent levity with which this
�16
admitted result is tolerated, even by those
who profess to regret it, and to wish it
changed. Only the other day, this same
Times said (7th May, 1864):—
“ If you despise an accomplishment, you
may live to want it. Indeed, there are few
men who do not confess, some time or other,
that they would give a good deal to be able
to learn what they could have learnt easily in
their youth. It is very common to see gentle
men long past the freshness of youth making
violent efforts to learn music, chymistry, geo
logy, botany, and a good many other things.
At a much earlier date, a young gentleman,
having by great interest got his name on the
Foreign-office, finds himself condemned to a
French master for a twelvemonth before he
can get an appointment; or he travels, and
finds an impassable gulf between himself and
every human being who cannot speak Eng
lish. He may even become painfully con
scious of a much more serious defect, in a
total ignorance of English literature, down to
the composition of a sentence, the wording of
a note, or the spelling of words in common
use. He may expose himself to those with
whom he has every reason to stand well. He
may hear conversations about the incidents
of war or history, in which he will find it wise
to avoid taking a part, lest his geography
should be found wanting. On these occasions
the strongest conviction that he can write
Latin hexameters better than any of the com
pany will hardly sustain self-respect under
the detection of profound geographical or his
torical ignorance. These, however, a/re only
inconveniences; and, to the sound English
reason, are trifles compared with the disci
pline of the mind. But even in that point of
view, all these accomplishments—and we must
add to them mathematics—have their value
in giving breadth and elasticity to the intel
lect, besides that opportunity of change which
is necessary to many learners.”
All this admitted ignorance and inca
pacity are, it seems, “only inconveniences
—trifles compared with the discipline of
the mind.” But it occurs to ask, How
far are this ignorance and incapacity com
patible with the much-lauded discipline of
the mind; and would not the removal of
this very ignorance and incapacity, as the
Times itself admits in the very next sen
tence, do much to promote the discipline
of the mind ? Everywhere, and for ever,
do we find this unhappy and groundless
contrast between what is called, almost
with a sneer, “ useful knowledge,” and
mental discipline,— as if it were only
through useless knowledge, or stuff too
useless to be called knowledge, that men
tal discipline can be attained. Similarly
pernicious and baseless is the current pre
ference of what is acquired with toil and
pain to what is acquired with ease and
pleasure. * Of the body it is true that only
what food is taken with healthy appetite
can be healthfully digested, and converted
into blood and tissue; and so is it. with
the mind. Is it reasonable to believe that
utility and pleasure are inevitably di
vorced from educational influence, and
that the true value of learning lies in its
inutility and repulsiveness P f To classical
teaching I utterly refuse, in any case, the
monopoly of mental (discipline; and in the
case of those who never get beyond the
grammatical and verbal ’husks, I contend
that the mental influence is, to the young,
for evil, not for good. But the advocate
of the prevailing system, if driven from
the defence of mental discipline, shelters
himself behind other screens, such as
physical training, geni/us loci, influence of
numbers, esprit de corps, advantage of as
sociation with youths of rank and breed
ing. Of none of these things do I need
or wish to speak disparagingly; though,
as regards the last, it does strike me as
strange that those who spurn utility in
the matter of young men’s learning should
lay stress upon utility of a much lower
kind in the associations that they form.
But all these things are quite irrelevant,
unless it can be shown that a change of
subjects and mode of teaching would be
fatal to their existence. Would boys be
less addicted to football, cricket, and boat
ing, if they ceased to be ignoramuses P
Would the influence of numbers, and of
the rivalry which “ develops the manly
*
fllaiov ovSev ep.p.eves /J.d9np.a.—P:LA.TO.
t “ How stupidly wrong are they who speak' of
the dryness of study. And how marvellously sa
gacious were the fathers of the Latin language who
gave to the word studium the double meaning,
study and desire."—W. P. Scargill, Essays,
&c., p. 373. 1857.
�17
English character,” so much admired, we
are told, and envied by continental na
tions, perish if boys were taught what
interests, not disgusts, them, and what it
is of the utmost importance for their own
and for others’ sakes that they should
know ? If not, then away with such
flimsy pretexts, which do but thinly veil
an obstinate resistance to educational im
provement ! If I complain of scarcity and
badness of food, is it any answer to tell
me that the air is very pure, and the
prospect exquisitely fine. I rejoin, “ Give
me better food, and more of .it, and I will
better appreciate the purity of the air and
the loveliness of the prospect.” I remem
ber an advertisement of a vacant curacy
in one of the Southern counties, which is
scarcely a burlesque on this mode of rea
soning. It ended thus,—“ The salary is
small, but the sea-bathing is excellent.”
The learning is small (for, as Mr. Glad
stone says—
“ Boys learn but little here below,
And learn that little ill,”)—
things which need not be its substitutes
at all, but which ought to be its firm
allies and faithful friends. Even Mr.
Gladstone (who, in spite of his brilliant
and versatile talents, his rich and various
acquirements, is still a striking instance
of the defect which Mr. Faraday, in his
evidence, points out in men classically
*
trained) speaks, in his letter to the Com
missioners, of “ the low utilitarian argu
ment in matter of education, for giving it
what is termed a practical direction;” and
declares it to be “ so plausible, that we
may on the whole be thankful that the
instincts of the country have resisted what
in argument it has been ill able to con
fute.” In some amazement I turn up the
word imstinct in Johnson’s Dictionary; it
is there defined: “ Desire or aversion act
ing in the mind without the intervention
of reason or deliberation; the power de
termining the will of brutes.” I will not
ask whether instincts may be acquired, or
are necessarily innate. But never before,
probably, was so singular a duty assigned
to instinct as that of judging of the com
parative value of rival methods of school
training. Falstaff indeed says,—“ Beware
instinct. The lion will not touch the true
prince. Instinct is a great matter; I was
a coward on instinct.” To be an educa
tionist on instinct, and by instinct to
recognize the true system of education,
is a feat so remarkable, that I can hardly
believe it to be within the capacity of any
one man, much less of a whole nation. Is
it not, besides, the very business of reason
to lessen the exclusive domain of instinct,
and to guide instinct, where it does not
take its place? Mr. Gladstone’s recent
speech in the House of Commons presents
many subjects for remark; but time per
mits me to say here only that when he
charges the ineffectiveness of school
teaching on the “ luxury and self-indul
gence ” in which we live, and “ the laxity
which is essentially connected with the
but the cricket is excellent. If physical
exercise and amusement (for which, by the
way, I have long and earnestly pleaded)
are indeed the leading purpose of our
great schools,—and it would seem that at
Eton they absorb a very large proportion
of the school-life,—then let the fact be
avowed and acted on: cedat armis toga;
let the gown give place to bat, ball, and
wickets ; let cricket be promoted, vice
classics superseded, and let the HeadMastership be transferred to that vir
ca/ndidatus, Mr. Lillywhite, or the clas
sically denominated Mr. Julius Caesar.
Possibly, however, if cricket were made
compulsory and primary, and classics op
tional and secondary, we should have less
of the former and more of the latter, and
the change might be fatal to the very
supremacy of the physical training which
it was intended to promote. But, seri
ously, it is deplorable to see how parents
suffer themselves to be hoodwinked by the * See Frazer’s Magazine for February, 1864,
substitution for sound mental culture of p. 156.
�18
signal prosperity and wealth of the coun
try,” he virtually, though unconsciously,
passes the severest censure on those great
capitals of education, in which generation
after generation of our richer upper classes
have been allowed to grow up without any
guidance whatever as to the true duties,
any more than as to the true sources, of
wealth. But here is involved a conception
of youthful training which as yet has
dawned on only a very few minds, and of
which the Commissioners, unlike those
who reported not long ago on the state of
English primary schools, seem never to
have even heard. For aught they appear
to know, the successful attempts made,
for some years past, in and near this city,
to convey to poorer children knowledge
and training in this most vital subject,
embracing as it does all our economic and
other social relations, and full of interest
and instruction for both rich and poor,
might as well have been made in Nova
Zembla. The rising sun of education, un
like the physical sun, would seem to touch
first with his beams the lowly valley, and
then, through mist and cloud, slowly to
climb to the hill-tops.
This omission in the Commissioners’
Report detracts largely, in my opinion,
from its value. But I trust I am duly
grateful for what I find. The two great
wedges—Natural Science and Modern
*
Languages —which are destined, sooner
or later, to rend asunder the present sys
tem, have, at all events, received a vigorous
impulse which will not be lost. No vis
inertias can for ever prevail against testi
mony so clear and so emphatic as that
of Dr. Carpenter, Dr. Hooker, Professor
Owen, Sir Charles Lyell, Sir John Her
schel, Professor Faraday, and others,f to
the value of Natural Science, not for pur* “ The interchange of ideas with the contem
poraneous world is of as much importance as the
preservation of the ideas of the past; and the
tongues which men now speak are those which
men should learn to understand.’’—Sir Robert
Kane, 1849.
f I regret that Professor Tyndal and Drs. Lankester and Lyon Playfair were not examined.
poses of “ low practical utility,” but as an
instrument of mental discipline.
Meantime, it is cheering to have a
statement like the following from so emi
nent an authority as the Rev. Dr. Morti
mer, Head Master of the City of London
School:—
“It is my opinion, founded on very con
siderable experience, that the limited time
given to classics, in comparison with other
public schools, is fully made up by the in
creased mental power obtained by an ac
quaintance with many other subjects. At all
events, it is a fact, that the university career
of pupils of the City of London School is emi
nently successful; and the reason seems to
be, that from being early trained to take up
several different subjects of study, they ac
quire the faculty of readily adapting them
selves to the work set before them, and bring
to it a large amount of collateral information.”
(Vol. ii. p. 580.) *
Other evidence to alike effect might be
quoted. (See Vol. ii. p. 17.)
Still more encouraging is the declara
tion of Charles Neate, Esq., M.A., Fellow
of Oriel College, Oxford:—
“We cannot go on for-ever learning all that
our ancestors learned 300 years ago, and all
* “ It is generally agreed that the greater at
tention now given at most schools to mathematics,
history, and modern languages, whilst it has ad
vanced those subjects, and proved beneficial by
enlarging and stimulating the mind, has not in
jured scholarship.”—Report, vol. i. p. 25.
“We collect from the evidence that, speaking
generally (there are not a few exceptions), boys
who succeed in classics succeed also in mathematics
and in modern languages. This shows that, ordi
narily, any boy of good capacity may with advan
tage study each of these subjects, and may study
them all together.”—Report, vol. i. p. 16.
“As an almost invariable rule, the men who do
best in outlying subjects also do best in scholar
ship. Men of great intelligence will naturally be
greedy of all learning; and there is something,
too, in the awakening of a boy’s mind, even if he
is not of high ability, which far more than pays for
the outlay of time and energy.”—Rev. G. W.
Kitchin, M.A., Junior Censor of Christ Church,
Oxford.Report, vol. ii. p. 12.
“ During the years that I was at Rugby, from
1841 to 1847, the knowledge of mathematics and
modern languages advanced. Special masters
were appointed to teach those subjects. Sctiolarship during the same time advanced. Mathema
tics, history and geography, and modern languages
should certainly be taught at school. Nor need
scholarship suffer. The study of modern languages
would tend to improve, not to injure, scholarship.”
—Rev. C. W. Sandford, M.A., Senior Censor
of Christ-Church. Report, vol. ii. p. 11.
�19
that has grown up as new knowledge since
Of three plans which have been devised,
then. The time must come when we must and two of which are actually in operation
make a selection and a sacrifice. I think it
in various places in this and other coun
has come now.” (Vol. ii. p. 49.)
tries, for evading the ever-increasing dif
The great practical remedy suggested ficulties of the present system, this is, I
by Mr. Neate almost exactly coincides am convinced, by far the simplest, the
with what I have advocated for many most effective, and the one destined ulti
years. He proposes “that the learning mately to prevail. Against the other two
of either Latin or Greek should be post plans, whether that of having side by side,
poned till the age of 12 years [I would say in the same institution, a collegiate and a
14]; boys being up to that time taught non-collegiate department, or that called
their own language and one foreign lan in France “ bifurcation,” by which boys
guage, together with something of the who have been taught together up to 14
literature of either; also arithmetic, some
and 15 diverge, some to the modern or
portion of natural history, and, of course,
non-collegiate, others to the ancient or
the facts of their own history; in all which
collegiate side of the school,—there are
those boys more especially that come from
very grave objections. On both the Com
public schools are almost incredibly igno
missioners report with caution rather than
rant.” (Vol. ii. p. 49.) If the age of 14
approval. The third plan, according to
were adopted, the course of instruction
which all boys up to the age of 14 should
up to that age would be, and ought to be,
be taught together all the subjects really
considerably enlarged. Mr. Neate goes
most important for them all to know,
on:—“ I believe a boy so prepared would
whatever their lot in life,—classics being
learn more Latin and Greek between the
reserved for those who should remain long
ages of 12 and 16, than he does now be
enough at school to profit by the study,
tween the ages of 10 and 18.” “ But in
order to ensure this, great improvements to learn, in his sense, to lose a little more time,
are needed in our methods of teaching.” to delay a little longer before we begin teaching
Latin and Greek.”
(Ibid.) This proposal, heretical as it may Reform," 1836, p. —Sir Thos. Wyse, “ Educa.
166.
appear, is supported by high and ample “ We are of opinion that the study of the
learned languages ought not to be commenced till
authority; but, not to stray too far from the higher functions of fancy and feeling begin to
the Report before us, I will quote only a stir, and a taste for literature and reading begins
short passage from a pamphlet, “ Oxford to bud in the soul."—Professor Blackie, 1842.
“ I must say that in fixing upon ten as the
Reform and Oxford Professors,” published earliest age [at which the study of Latin or Greek
in 1854, by H. Halford Vaughan, Esq., ought to begin], I am by no means convinced that
it is best to begin so young. Judging from several
M.A., one of the Commissioners, and then instances which have come under my own obser
Regius Professor of History in the Uni vation, I am strongly inclined to believe that
twelve, or even fourteen, would be a better period
versity of Oxford:—“I believe it might for commencing Latin.”—Dr. J. H. Jerrard,
possibly be found that we have hitherto formerly Classical Examiner in the London Uni
learned the classical languages painfully, versity. the idea ever been suggested, that the
“ Has
imperfectly, and unseasonably,—slowly public schools should take nearly all of classical
study on themselves [i. e., relieving the prepara
imbibing rules by rote and by the ear, be tory schools from it]; that they should at least
cause we learn them at an age too unripe give up an entrance examination in Greek, but
standard in
spelling,
for a rational appreciation of such abstract I require a higher French, whichreading,thus form
history, &c., and
might
propositions, and losing thereby great part one of the principal previous studies, and then
.............
of the discipline so much boasted in the would not be so much required afterwardsto public
In this case, our sons would not go on
course of acquisition.” (p. 30, note.)
*
schools with so much Latin and Greek; but I beL
| lieve they would have a far greater capacity for
* “ We begin too soon, and we begin the wrong classical studies, and pleasure in studying, than
way. Rousseau says that one of the great arts of they ever now have.”—Letter signed “ G.,’’ in
education is to know how to lose time. We ought Times, 12th May, 1864.
�20
whether they go on to a University or not, proved to be bad be thrown aside, and let
•—would render classical instruction at advantage be taken of the private school
once easier and more effective in three teacher’s greater freedom, of the greater
ways : 1st, By the reduced number of flexibility of his system, unhampered by
those who take part in it; 2nd, By their charters, and traditions, and long prestige,
greater age; 3rd, By the greater develop to adopt whatever changes may seem most'
ment of their intelligence, due to their accordant, not with the whim of the mo
previous training in subjects more level ment, but with the growing tendencies
Jo their juvenile capacities, and more con and necessities of modern life. The tu
genial to their tastes. This innovation quoque argument is very well as a retort
was, doubtless, too formidable to be con to one-sided.satirists; it is a poor excuse
sidered by the Commissioners; but their for inaction and-indifference to improveReport, valuable as it is, is not finally | ment. If, as is possible, a Commission be
conclusive, and their suggestions, in so appointed by Parliament for inquiry into
far as they may be adopted, will render the state of middle-class school-teaching,
the introduction of it easier hereafter. Any I trust that you will aid, not obstruct, its
one who has had the twofold experience investigations; that you will not close
of teaching to young pupils what they your doors against examination. You
learn willingly, and what they learn invita have, or ought to have, nothing to con
\ut aiunt) Minerva, and who is competent ceal. A good school, like a good house
to more than “gerund-grinding,” will wife, can never be caught en deshabille.
hail with gladness a change which will I for one do not fear the result. There
render his labour at once more pleasing cannot surely be many private school
masters who, under examination the most
and more efficient.
There are yet many things of which I rigorous, would rival the evasiveness, the
inconsistency, the narrowness, and the
should wish to speak,
“ Sed jam tempos equum fumantia solvere petulance displayed by the Rev. Head
colla.”
Master of Eton, or the humiliating want
In conclusion, let me hope that this of acquaintance with the moral evil per
Report will be of service to the large body vading his own school, and of power to
of private-school teachers who chiefly con put it down, revealed by the Rev. Head
stitute this College of Preceptors. Dis Master of Westminster. But a much
paraged and maligned as they too often higher level than all this would still be
are, they will not, I trust, rest satisfied in too low. To the progress now going on
the belief that, bad as private schools may in private middle-class schools, in schools
sometimes be, the large public schools for primary instruction of both sexes, and
have now been shown to be, most pro not least, in schools for girls of the middle
bably, much worse. Rather let warning and upper classes, much more than even
be taken from the signal and melancholy to the direct effect of such a revelation as
failure here set forth, all the more strik this, startling as it is, do I look for the
ingly because by friendly hands ; let the steady rise and swell of public opinion
causes of that failure be' anxiously consi which shall sweep away the accumulated
dered ; let all slavish copying of models abuses in our public schools.
London: Printed by C. F. Hodgson & Son, Gough Square, Fleet Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
On the report of the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the condition of the principal public schools: a paper read at the monthly evening meeting of the College of Preceptors, May 11th, 1864
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 2nd
Place of publication: London
Collation: 20 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed in double columns. Minor annotation correcting typo p. 14.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Hodgson, W. B. (William Ballantyne)
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
W. Aylott & Son
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5193
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (On the report of the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the condition of the principal public schools: a paper read at the monthly evening meeting of the College of Preceptors, May 11th, 1864), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Education
Public Schools
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/612a86d21a17fc3e11eb6f6cd2cb4630.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=MqmbZa-sBKGuQqIkFdiXhyxPJ6Lq-Ni-iLWaquDFXWM-E4zeM2qqQblRxF5eI-RpoYMTvAwZvBJ7so9zWa2j3tkH1xbTgN0WEynmBbjdQBIyxtP5URUHKF0GliUnNlScubCEOKOrcW5Kb8KpbK%7EwzSGgggdP6r82w3oyJJg3DzVS3p7BePpNh5H3l0Jv2o0mrpmDxHQjutwb7QOm%7EABK9s1CSA4j0By75pj6S2RwfsoHgLwuivErxPLE9qCpDrOsR2KJCdiSD53s%7EOgg8wEOMC9L5syIngGirbkbu2k3ycmNv1T-Zttzj2aa36bEOAsS9rawRNDe3KCUDYGIvZeeKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
bea4926af6caea4682ebe176f37ca957
PDF Text
Text
A DISCOURSE
AGAINST HERO-MAKING
>
$n
*
^tligxan,
DELIVERED IN SODTH PLACE CHAPEL, FINSBURY,
April 24th, 1864.
BY
FRANCIS W. NEWMAN.
Printed by request, with, Enlargements.
LONDON:
TEUBNER AND CO., 60, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1864.
�“ Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom
ye believed ?
“ Paul planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
Wherefore let no man glory in men.”
�-e
DISCOURSE
AGAINST
HERO-MAKING IN RELIGION,
OR more than twenty years we have been made familiar
F
with the phrase Hero-Worship.
It has been applied
not only in the regions of politics and literature, but in
religion, as the phrase itself strictly claims.
We have been
told, from very opposite quarters, that the' excellence, as well
as the characteristic, of the Christian religion turns on its
venerating a personal hero in Jesus of Nazareth.
Many who
regard Jesus as a mere man, yet insist upon inscribing them
selves his servants and followers, and on so wedding their
honour for him with their adoration to God most high, as
systematically to incorporate the two.
Nay, some who utterly
disown allegiance to Jesus—who think him to have taught
• many things erroneously, and to have had nothing super
natural in his character, in his powers, in his knowledge, in
his virtue, in his birth, or in his communications with God—
still maintain that he is fitly called the Regenerator of man
kind, and ought to receive—I know not what acknowledg
ment—as our Saviour.
It appears then not superfluous to
bestow a little space on the treatment of this question.
�4
I need hardly observe that personal qualities alone in no
case constitute a hero.
Action and success must be added;
and action cannot succeed until the times are ripe.
knows this better than the true hero.
No one
True genius is modest
in self-appreciation, and is fully aware how many other men
could have achieved the same results if the same rare con
juncture of circumstances had presented itself to them.
Men
of genius are fewer than common men, but they are no
accident.
God has provided for their regular and continuous
recurrence; theii birth is ordinary and certain in every nation
*
which is counted by millions.
The same is true in every
form of mental pre-eminence, whether capacity for leadership,
or genius for science, or religious and moral susceptibility.
Religion, separate from morals, is, of course, only fanaticism.
We venerate religion only when built upon pure morals.
Moral religion is notoriously a historic growth, and has de
pended on traditional culture at least as much as what is
especially called science; and its progress is not more way
ward and arbitrary than that of science, if the whole of
human history be surveyed.
The present is ever growing
out of the past, with a vigour and a certainty which never
allow the fortunes of the race to be seriously dependent on
any individual.
Each of us is, morally as well as physically,
a birth out of antecedents.
From childhood we are tutored
in right and wrong, not only by professed teachers, but by
all elder persons who are around us.
Improper deeds or
words of a child are reproved by a servant, or by an elder
brother, or even by a stranger, as well as by a parent or a
priest.
We imbibe moral sentiment, as it were, at every
pore of our moral nature; nor do we often know from whom
�5
we learned to abhor this course of conduct and to love that.
Hence no wise man will claim originality for his moral
judgments or religious sentiments.
A foolish dogma, a
fanciful tenet, may easily be original; but a pure sound
truth is more likely to have been old.
To prove its novelty
is impossible, and certainly could not recommend it: on the
contrary, the older we can prove it to have been, the greater
its ostensible authority.
For these reasons, in the theory of
morals and religion, a claim of originality can seldom or
never be sustained: in this whole field the question is less
■what a man has taught, than what he has persuaded others.
Hundreds of us may have said, truly and wisely: “ It is a
great pity that Mohammedans, Jews, and Christians of every
sect will not unlearn their dissensions, and blend into one
religious community.”
The sentiment must once have been
even new; yet its utterance coidd never have earned praise
and distinction.
But if any one devoted his life to bring
about such union, and succeeded in it, we should undoubtedly
regard him as a moral hero; though (as just said) no one
could succeed, until the fulness of time arrived and the crisis
was seized judiciously.
Thus, in discussing the claims put forth for special and
indeed exclusive honour to the name of Jesus, we have to
consider, not so much what he said, or is said to have said, as
what he effected; what impression he actually produced by
his life and teaching; what great, noble, abiding results his
energies originated and bequeathed.
The moment we ask,
What are the facts ? we seem to be plunged into waves of
most uncertain controversy; into discussions of literature
unsuitable for short oral treatment.
Yet, before the present
�6
audience, I may with full propriety claim as admitted that
which greatly clears our way.
I presume you to know
familiarly, that the picture of Jesus in the fourth gospel is
essentially irreconcilable with that in the three which
precede, and is neither trustworthy nor credible.
The
three first gospels, taken by themselves, do present a
character, a moral picture, sufficiently self-consistent and
intelligible to reason about.
But our present question (allow
me carefully to insist) is
Do we see in Jesus a remarkable
not,
man, a gifted peasant, a dogmatist by "whom we may profit,
whose noble sentiments we may admire or applaud? but
rather, Do we find one who dwarfs all others before and after
him? one to whose high superiority sages and prophets
must bow; before whom it is reasonable and healthful for
those who have a hundredfold of his knowledge and breadth
of thought to take the place of little children ?
Or, at least,
Has Europe and the world (as a fact) learned from him what
it was not likely to learn without him ?
Is that
trve
which
1s dinned into our ears, that Christendom has imbibed from
him a pure, spiritual, large-hearted, universal religion,
adapted to man as man, cementing mankind as a family, and
ennobling the individual by a new and living Spirit, unknown
to the philosophies, unknown to the priesthoods, untaught by
the prophets, before him ?
Even if we had no insight as to the comparative value of
the several gospels, one broad certainty affords solid ground
to plant the foot upon.
The positive institutions and active
spirit of the first Christian church are notorious and indubit
able;
On learning what the Apostles established in their
Master’s name within a few weeks of his death, We know
�7
with full certainty what they had understood him to leach}
what impression he actually produced, what was the real net
result of his life and preaching: and this, in fact, is our
main question.
Now, it is true beyond dispute—it is con
ceded by every sect of Christians—that in the first Christian
church the Levitical ceremonies were maintained with zealous
rigour, and that its only visible religious peculiarity consisted
in community of goods.
The candidate for baptism professed
no other creed but that Jesus was Messiah; and the obedience
of the disciple to the Master was practically manifested in the
sudden renunciation of private property.
This ordinance
was not, in theory, compulsory; but, while the fervour of
faith was new, it was enforced by the public opinion of the
church so sharply, as to tempt the richer disciples to
hypocrisy.
The story of Ananias and Sappliira is full of
instruction-.
They did not wish to alienate all their goods,
though they were "willing to be very liberal.
In deference
to the prevailing sentiment, they sold property and gave
largely to the church; yet were guilty of keeping back a part
for themselves secretly.
For this fraud (according to the
legend) they were both struck dead at the voice of Peter!
Such a legend could not have arisen, except in a church
which regarded absolute Communism as the characteristic
Christian virtues
Higher proof is not needed that Jesus
established this duty as the touchstone of discipleship: butj
in fact; the account in the three gospels tallies herewith
perfectly.
Jesus there mourns over a rich young man, as
refusing the law of PeHi’ection, because he hesitates to sell
all his goods; give them to the poor, and become a mendicant
friar,
When his disciples, commenting on the young man’s
�8
failure to fulfil tlio test, say: “ Lo! we have left all and
followed thee: what shall we have therefore?”
Jesus in
reply’ promises, that, in reward for having sacrificed to him
the gains of their industry and abandoning their relatives,
they shall sit upon thrones, and judge the twelve tribes of
Israel.
(In passing I remark, that the idea of such a reward
for such a deed is shocking to a Pauline Christian.)
The Jerusalem church was, alone of all churches, founded
by the' chosen representatives of Jesus on the doctrine of
Jesus himself, while the remembrance of that doctrine was
fresh.
It was a special community, not unlike a “ religious
order ” of modern Europe; and could not be discriminated,
by Jews any more than by Homans, from a Jewish sect.
In
the next century, those who seem to have been its direct
successors were called Ebionite heretics by the Gentile
Christians.
When Paul, who ostentatiously refused to learn
anything from the actual hearers of Jesus, had put forth
what he calls “ his own ” gospel—namely,“ the mystery that
Gentiles "were to be fellow-heirs ” without Levitical purity—
he brought on himself animosity and violent opposition from
the Christians of Jerusalem, who were the historical fruit of
Jesus’ own planting.
When Paul was in Jerusalem, one of
the leaders called his attention to the fact that, while many
thousands of Jews were believers, they were “ all zealous of
the law; ” he therefore advised him to pacify their mis
givings and suspicions of him, by performing publicly certain
Judaical ceremonies.
Paul obeyed him: nevertheless, no
such conformities could atone for his offence in teaching that
Gentiles, while free from the law, were equal to the Jews
before God; and Paul to his last day experienced enmity
�9
from the zealous members of that church.
His relations to
the other Apostles we know by his own account to have been
certainly cold.
He seems to be personally pointed at in the
Epistle of James, as “a vain man,” who preaches faith
without works; while he himself (as he tells us) publicly
attacked Petei’ at Antioch as a dissembler and weak truckler
to Jerusalem bigotry.
When, from first to last, the doctrine
of the church at Jerusalem was sternly Levitical, it is quite
incredible that Jesus ever taught his disciples the religious
nullity of Levitical ceremonies and the equality of Gentiles
with Jews before God.
But why need I argue about this,
when it is distinctly clear on the face of the narrative ?
In
the book of Acts the idea that “ God is no respecter of
persons ”—or of nations—breaks upon the mind of Peter as
a new revelation, and is said to have been imparted by a
special vision.
It is not pretended that Jesus had taught it;
nor does Paid, in any of his controversies against Judaism,
dare to appeal to the authority and doctrine of the earthly
Jesus as on his side.
In fact, in the Sermon on the Mount,
as also in a passage of Luke (xvi. 17), Jesus declares that he
is not come to destroy the law; and that “Bather shall
heaven and earth pass away, than shall one tittle of the law
fail.”
I am, of course, aware that Christian theologians
would have us believe that Luke is here defective, and that
the words in Matthew, “ Until all be fulfilled,” mean “ Until
my death shall fulfil all the types.”
But this would make
Jesus purposely to deceive his disciples by a riddle.
This is
indeed worse than trifling, and a gratuitous imputation on
the teacher’s truthfulness.
was understood.
He must have known how he
They supposed him to mean that Levitisnx
�10
was eternal; and lie did not correct the impression.
It was
then the very impression which he designed to make, simply
and truthfully; and the disciples, one and all, rightly under
stood him, and knew it well.
The verse which follows in Matthew clenches the argu
ment ; although (I see I must in candour add) I do not
believe that Jesus spoke it in exactly this form.
Never
theless, it emphatically shows how the writer interpreted the
verse preceding.
For he makes Jesus to add: “ Wherefore,
whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and
shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom
of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
I find
myself unable to doubt that these words were written to
mean: “ Wherefore, one like Paul, who breaks the Levitical
ceremonies, and teaches the Gentiles to break them, is least
in my kingdom; but James, and the Apostles in Jerusalem,
who do and teach them, are great in my kingdom.”
The
intensity of feeling on this subject was such, that the Jewish
Christians easily believed Jesus to have prophetically warned
them against Paul’s error.
Be this as it may, the formula,
° break one of these least commandments, and teach men to
break it,” is in contrast to “ fulfilling the law,” and distinctly
shows that “ fulfilling the law ” refers to doing and enforcing
even the least commandments;
The Jerusalem church was the product (and, as far as wd
know, the only direct product) of the teachings of Jesus. Of
its sentiment we have an interesting Exhibition in the epistle
of James; in whom We see a high and severe moralist, pure
and exacting, full of righteous indignation against the
�11
oppression of the poor by the rich, and against all haughtiness
of wealth. He does not treat all private property as unchris
tian ; but only large property.
Evidently no rich man could
have seemed venerable to the chief saints in that church.
He assumes the guilt of all rich men, and announces misery
about to come on them, as does Jesus in the parable of Lazarus:
nevertheless, in him all the harshest parts of Jesus’ precepts
have been softened by the trial of practical life.
In fact, this
epistle is much in the tone of the very noblest of the Hebrew
prophets.
As with them, so in him, the moral element is
wholly predominant, and nothing ceremonial obtrudes itself.
Nay, what is really remarkable, he calls his doctrine the
K perfect law of libertyso little did those ceremonies oppress
him, to which from childhood he had been accustomed.
Let
due honour be given to this specimen of the first and only
genuine Christianity; yet it is difficult to find anything that
morally distinguishes it from the teachings of an Isaiah or a
Joel.
There is certainly a diversity: for the political ele
ments of thought have disappeared, which under the Hebrew
monarchy were prominent.
The great day of the Lord was
no longer expected to glorify the royalty of Jerusalem and
its national laws : and in this diversity lay the germ of great
changes.
It would be absurd to censure an epistle because it is not a
ritual, or to demand in it the fervours of spirituality found in
this or that psalm. Nevertheless, in the present Connection, I
must claim attention to the fact that neither the three Gospels,
nor the epistle pf James have ever been in high favour with
that Caivinistic or Augustinian school which most nearly
Represents Paul to the moderns;
To bring out the argument
�12
in hand more clearly, allow me to make a short digression.
Morality requires both action and sentiment.
No reasonable
teacher can undervalue either : yet some moral teachers press
more on action, and are said to preach duty and work; and
even make a duty of sentiment, laying down as a command
that we shall love God, love our neighbours, love not ease,
love not self.
Other teachers endeavour to excite, foster, and
develop just sentiment, and trust that it will generate just
action: possibly they even run into the error of shunning
definite instruction as to what action is good.
Finite and
one-sided as we are, two schools naturally grow up among
teachers, who may be classed as the preachers of duty and
the preachers of sentiment: but perhaps, if the question be
distinctly proposed to the ablest men of either school, “ Do
we learn action from sentiment, or sentiment from action ?”
they would alike reply (as in substance does Aristotle) that
both processes necessarily co-exist.
From childhood upward,
right action promotes right feeling, and right feeling generates
or heightens right action.
of the two schools.
There is no real or just collision
Nevertheless, as a fact of human history
easily explained, the preaching of duty and of outward action
gains everywhere an early and undue ascendency, perhaps
especially where morals and religion are taught by law, which
deals in command and threat.
The rude man and the child
are subjected to rule more or less arbitrary; and it is only
when intellect rises in a nation or in an individual that the
spiritual side of morals receives its proportionate attention.
In Greek history, we know the fact in the philosophy of
Socrates and Plato.
Among the Hebrews, a secular increase
of spirituality in the highest teachers will probably be con
�13
ceded by critics of every school to have gone on from the
time of the judge Samuel to the writer from whom came the
last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah.
The characteristic
difference of the Greek and the Hebrew is this: that, however
spiritual the Greek morality might be, it seldom blended with
religion; and (with exceptions perhaps only to be found under
Hebrew influences, as at Alexandria) the moral affections
found no place in religion at all.
Now it has been recently
asserted by a Theist, that it is to Jesus that we owe that
regeneration of religion, which makes it begin and grow from
within. He is not (it is said) “ a mere teachei’ of pure ethics;”
but “his work has been in the heart.
He has transformed
the Law into the Gospel. He has changed the bondage of the
alien for the liberty of the sons of God.
He has glorified
virtue into holiness, religion into piety, and duty into love.”
Hence it is inferred that “his coming was to the life of
humanity what regeneration is to the life of the individual.”*
Deep as is my sympathy with the writer from whom I
quote, I am constrained to say that every part of the state
ment appears to me historically incorrect. It does, in the first
place, violent injustice to the Hebrews who preceded Jesus.
Did he first “ glorify virtue into holiness” ?
Nay, from the
very beginning of Hebraism this was done—at least as early
as Samuel.
Did he first “ glorify religion into piety” ?
Is
there then no piety in the 42nd Psalm ? in the 63rd ? in the
* I quote from the striking treatise of my friend Miss Cobbe,
called “ Broken Lights.” The whole protest against M. Renan, of
which the words above are the summary, should be read to under
stand their relation. I am authorized to say that she has not even
the remotest wish to make honour to Jesus a part of religion: she
intended to write as a historian only:
�14
27th ? in the 23rd ? Nay, I might ask; from what utterances
of Jesus can piety be learned by the man who cannot learn
it from the Psalms ?
Holiness and piety appear to me to
have been taught and exemplified quite as effectively before
Jesus as since.
Surely in the religion of the psalmists piety
dominated, as much as in Fenelon or in the poet Cowper. But
finally I have to ask, “ Did Jesus glorify duty into love?”
And, in order to reply, I turn to the three gospels, as con
taining our best account of what he taught.
A phenomenon there very remarkable is the severity with
which Jesus enforces as duty the most painful renunciations ;
and the contempt with which he rejects anything short of
immediate obedience to his arbitrary demands.
I know not
whether the narrators have overcoloured him ; but they give
us, on the one side, examples of prompt obedience to the com
mand, “ Follow me:” first, in Andrew and Peter; next, in
James and John ; who <l immediately left the ship and their
father, and followed him.”
highly meritorious.
This is afterwards praised as
On the other side, when Jesus says to a
man, "Follow me,” and receives the reply, “Lord, suffer me
first to go and bury my father,” Jesus retorts: “Let the dead
bury their dead, but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.
Another also said, Lord, I will follow thee, but let me first go
and bid them fareioell which are at home in my house.
And
Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the
plough and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.”
The peremptory command to abandon their parents, not bury
a dead father, and not even say a word of farewell to the
living, is perhaps a credulous exaggeration of the writer; yet
it is in close harmony with the whole account, and with the
�15
declaration, “ He that hateth not liis father and mother, and
wife and children, cannot be my disciple
for evidently the
following of Jesus, as interpreted and enforced by himself,
involved an abandonment (perhaps to starvation) of these
near relatives.
It is not my purpose to dwell now on the
right or wrong of such precepts, but on the imperious tone in
which they are imposed fromzoithout, not the slightest attempt
being made to recommend them to the heart or understanding.
Again, in perfect harmony with the same is the reply, already
adduced, of Jesus to the rich young1 man, who comes to ask,
“What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”
The
opportunity was excellent to set forth that no outward actions
could bring eternal life, but that such life was an interior and
divine state, to be sought by love and faithfulness.
Instead
of spiritual instruction, Jesus gives a crushing arbitrary com
mand : “ If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell that thou hast, and
give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and
come and follow me.” Does such a teacher build from within
by implanting Love ? Does he act upon Love at all, or rather
on selfish Ambition?
He deals in hard duty and fierce
threat; commands too high, and motives too low; thoughts
of reward; promises of power; salvation by works; invest
ment of money for returns beyond the grave; prudential
adoption of virtue, which may soften judgment, win pro
motion, deliver from prospective prison and hell fire: topics
which at best are elements of Law, as opposed to Gospel.
In
the opinion of an increasing fraction of the most enlightened
Christians, the most noxious element in the popular creed is
the eternal Hell: the stronghold of this doctrine is in the
discourses of Jesus.
But what of Faith?
If Faith be a
�16
purely spiritual movement, which cleaves to Goodness and
Truth for its own sake, and without regard to selfish interests,
it is hard to say in what part of the three gospels it is found.
In the mind of Jesus all actions seem to stand in the closest
relation to the thoughts of punishment or reward on a great
future day.
To lose one’s soul means, to be sentenced when
that day shall come : cutting off a sin means, escaping muti
lated from a future hell.
In a religion practically moulded
on these discourses, calculation of what we shall hereafter
get by present obedience inheres as a primary essence.
The
only faith which Jesus extols, is, faith to work miracles, and
faith that he is Messiah and can work them.
frowned down and sighed over as unbelief.
Inquiry is
Power to forgive
sin is claimed by him; and, when this is reproved as impious
in a human teacher, the claim is marvellously justified by
identifying forgiveness with cure of bodily disease.
Add to
this the grant of miraculous powers to the Seventy, and a
delegation of power to forgive is made out at which Pro
testants may well shudder.
In another place (Luke vii. 4, 5)
Jesus declares forgiveness of sin to be earned by personal
affection to himself; but I am bound to add that, on special
*
grounds, I do not believe the account.
* The narrative in Luke vii. 37—50 seems to be an inaccurate
duplicate of that in Matt. xxvi. 6, Mark xiv. 3, John xii. 3; which
nearly agree as to time and place—viz., it was in Bethany, a little
before the last Passover. Matthew and Mark say, it was in the house
of Simon the leper : Luke says, of Simon the Pharisee. John calls
the woman Mary of Bethany, sister of Lazarus and of Martha:
Luke says, a woman notorious for sin. I will here remark, that
discussion on the behaviour of Jesus to women of ill fame, which is
called “ delicate,” “ beautiful,” “ characteristic,” &c., appeal’s to me
wholly without basis of fact. Those who allow no historical cha
�17
Luke has in some parts added softer touches to Jesus, and
gives us two fine parables which it is astonishing that Matthew
and Mark omit, while they retail so many that are monoto
nous : yet even in Luke I seek in vain for anything calculated
to implant in the heart a sense of freedom ; to excite willing
service; or to cherish spiritual desire, gratitude and tranquil
In fact, Luke
love, careless of other reward than love itself.
is sometimes harsher than Matthew. Thus, in vi. 20, “ Blessed
be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Blessed are ye
that hunger now, for ye shall be filled.
But woe unto
.
.
you that are rich; for ye have received your consolation.
unto you that are full; for ye shall hunger.
Woe
Woe unto you
that laugh now; for ye shall mourn and weep.”
So indiscri
minate and thoughtless-are devotees, that such doctrine meets
with the same theoretic glorification as the essentially different
version of Matthew: “ Blessed are the poor in spirit.
.
.
Blessed are ye who hunger and thirst after righteousness.”
If Matthew be correct and Luke’ wrong, Luke has foisted
upon Jesus curses against rich and mirthful men, in contrast
racter to the discourses in John will not quote John iv. 16—19, nor
John viii. 1—11, against this remark: and nothing remains but Luke
vii. 37—50. The fair fame of Mary Magdalene has been blasted by
believing this story in Luke, and then identifying her with the
woman.
I will add that many who must know seem to forget, that no
Greek philosopher—neither an Anaxagoras nor a Zeno, to say
nothing of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca—would ever
have felt crude or unjust severity towards a woman’s faults. If
English sentiment sometimes appear harsh against women who have
made a trade of themselves, is it not because sins which are gainful
to the sinner are more inveterate and more contagious than sins
which imf'Oterish him ?
B
�18
to the blessings on poverty and weeping: but if the curses
came from the lips of Jesus, Luke gives the opposite clauses
justly; in which case Matthew has improved monkish into
spiritual sentiment.
It would be a hard task to prove Luke’s
version out of harmony with the constant doctrines of Jesus.
To borrow Calvinistic phraseology, and (if my memory serves
me) the very words of a Pauline spiritualist: “ The three
gospels may be read in the churches till doomsday, without
converting a single soul.”
The spiritual side of Christianity,
inherited from the Hebrew psalmists, not from Jesus, was
diffused beyond Judaea, first by the Jewish synagogues, next
by the school of Paul, to whom the school of Jesus was in
fixed opposition, preaching works and the law, while Paul
preached the Spirit and faith. “ Though I give all my goods
to feed the poor,” says Paul, “ and give my body to be burned,
and have not charity, I am nothing.”
How vast the contrast
here to the doctrine of Jesus: “ Every one that hath forsaken
houses, oi’ brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife,
or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive a hun
dredfold, and shall inherit eternal life.”
To make ascetic
sacrifices for the honour of Jesus was indeed a surpassing
merit in his eyes, unless the most important discourses, even
in these three gospels, extravagantly belie him.
I am unable
to discover on what just ground the opinion stands that the
character of Jesus is less harsh, and his precepts less sourly
austere than those of John the Baptist.
Little as we are told
of the latter (all of which is honourable), the two must have
had close similarities.
Let it be remembered that Apollos is
spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles as “ instructed in the
�19
way of the Lord, and fervent in spirit, and teaching diligently
the things of the Lord,” while he “ knew only the baptism of
John.”
So also Paul falls in with “certain disciples” at
Ephesus, who pass as Christians ; yet he presently discovers
that they also know only John’s baptism.
It seems there
fore evident, that the two schools had nothing essential to
divide them, and were intimately alike.
When, on the other
hand, the sharp opposition of the Pauline doctrine to that of
James and the church of Jesus at Jerusalem is duly estimated,
some may think that certain words put into the mouth of
John the Baptist will become less untrue if changed as
follows: “ I indeed and Jesus baptize you with water unto
repentance and poverty ; but Paul shall baptize you with the
Holy Spirit and with fire.”
Be that as it may—give as little
weight as you please to Paul’s strong points—press as heavily
as you will on his weak side, out of which came the worst
part of Calvinism—the fact remains, that Jesus did not teach
Christianity to the Gentiles, or declare them admissible to
his church without observing Mosaism; and that to the Jews
themselves he preached merely severe precepts, ethical or
monkish, with a minimum of what can be called Gospel;—
precepts, on which a religious order might be founded, but
totally unsuitable for a world-wide religion.
When people calmly tell me that Jesus first established
the brotherhood of man, the equality of races, the nullity of
ceremonies; that he overthrew the narrowness of Judaism;
that he found a national, but left a universal religion; found
a narrow-minded ceremonial, and originated a spiritual prin
ciple, I can do nothing but reply that every one of these
b
2
�2Q
statements is groundless and contrary to fact,
What his
disciples never understood him to teach, he certainly did not
teach effectually.
It is childish to reply that the fault lay in
the stupidity of the twelve Apostles.
speak as plainly as Paul did ?
What! could not Jesus
Surely, the more stupid the
hearer, the more plainly the teacher is bound to speak.
If
Jesus had so spoken, never could want of spirituality in the
hearer have made the words unintelligible.
Did only the
spiritual understand Paul when he proclaimed the overthrow
of ceremonies ?
Could the most stupid of mortals have failed
to understand Jesus also, if he had avowed that the Levitical
ordinances were a nullity and Gentiles the religious equals of
Jews ?
I may seem to insult men’s intellect by pressing these
questions; but do not they rather insult our intellect ?
For
they would have us believe Jesus to have originated doctrines
which are the very opposite of all that his actual hearers and
authorized expounders established as his, before there was
time for his teaching to fade from their memory, and to be
modified by novelties supervening.
I have called the primitive church of Jerusalem the only
direct product of Jesus.
Do I deny that Jesus bore any part
at all in setting up the creed known in Europe as Christian -
ism ?
I wish I could wholly deny it.
Gladly would I relieve
his memory of all responsibility for dogmas, whence proceed
far more darkness and weakness of mind, confusion, bitterness,
and untractable •enmities, than his moral teaching can ever
dispel; dogmas which as effectually break up good men into
hostile sects, with fixed walls of partition between them, as
ever did the ceremonialism which he is falsely imagined to
�21
have destroyed.
But, hard as it is to know how much of the
gospels is historical, I suppose that no one for three centuries
at least has doubted that Jesus avowed himself to be Messiah,
at first privately, at last ostentatiously; and was put to death
for the avowal.
ground.
If so much be historical, we are on firm
There is then no room for transcendental philoso
phies and imaginative theories, as to what authority and
honour Jesus was claiming.
The Jews of that day familiarly
understood that Messiah was to be a Prince from Heaven, who
should rule and judge on earth.
As to the great outlines of
his character and power, manifestly there was no dispute.
If
the popular notions on this subject were wrong, the first busi
ness with Jesus must have been to set them right.
But he
never discourses against them, nor shows alarm lest he be
thought to claim supernatural dignity and lordship: nor
could his riding triumphantly on the ass, amid shouts of
“ Hosanna to the Son of David! ” have been intended to dis
courage the belief that he was to exercise temporal as well as
spiritual royalty.
The learned and the vulgar were in full
agreement that Messiah was to be a supreme Prince and
Teacher to Israel, Judge and Lord of all nations: but the
rulers regarded it as impious, criminal, and treasonable to
aspire to this dignity w’hile unable to exhibit some miraculous
credentials. The fixed belief concerning Messiah was gathered,
not only from our canonical prophets, but also from the book
called “ The Wisdom of Solomon ” (whichwvas in the Greek
Bible of Paul and other Hellenist Jews), and still more vividly
from the book of Enoch, which Jude and Peter quote rever
entially, and Jude ascribes to the prophet Enoch, the seventh
�22
from Adam.
With the discovery of that book early in this
century a new era for the criticism of Christianity ought to
have begun; for it is evidently the most direct fountain of
the Messianic creed.
The book of Mormon does not stand
alone as a manifest fiction which had power to generate a
new religion; the book of Enoch is a like marvellous exhibi
tion of human credulity.
A recent German critic has given
the following summary of its principal contents
It not
only comprizes the scattered allusions of the Old Testament
in one grand picture of unspeakable bliss, unalloyed virtue,
and unlimited knowledge: it represents the Messiah as both
King and Judge of the world, who has the decision over
everything on earth and in heaven.
He is the Son of Man
who possesses righteousness; since the God of all spirits
has elected him, and since he has conquered all by righteous
ness in eternity.
He is also the Son of God, the Elected one,
the Prince of Righteousness.
which knows all secret things.
is poured out upon him.
He is gifted with that wisdom
The Spirit in all its fulness
His glory lasts to all eternity.
He
shares the throne of God’s majesty: kings and princes will
worship him, and will invoke his mercy.”*
So much from
the book of Enoch ; which undoubtedly was widely believed
among the contemporaries of Jesus.
How much of the self
glorifying language put into the mouth of Jesus was actually
uttered by him it is impossible to know. There is always
room for the opinion that only later credulity ascribed this
* I quote from a summary of the book of Enoch by the German
theologian Kalisch, given in Bishop Colenso’s Appendix to his 4th
volume on the Pentateuch.
�23
and that to him—that (for instance) he did not really speak
the parable about the sheep and goats, representing himself
as the Supreme Judge who awards heaven or hell to every
human soul.
But it remains, that this parable distinctly
shows the nature of the dignity which Jesus was supposed to '
claim in calling himself Son of Man ; and, even if we arbi- trarily pare away from his discourses this and other details
in defereflce to Unitarian surmise, we still cannot get rid of
what pervades the whole narrative, that Jesus from the
beginning adopted a tone of superhuman authority and
obtrusion of his own personal greatness, with the title “ Son
of Man,” allusive both to Daniel and to the book of Enoch.
According to Daniel, one like unto a Son of Man will come in
the clouds of heaven to receive eternal dominion over all
nations.
It is impossible to doubt, that, in the mind of those
to whom Jesus spoke, the character of Messiah implied an
overshadowing supremacy, a high leadership over Israel, and
hereby over the Gentiles, who were to come and sit at Israel’s
feet: a religious and, as it were, princely pre-eminence, which
only one mortal could receive, who by it was raised im
measurably above all others.
If he did not intend to claim
this, it was obviously his first duty to disclaim it, and to warn
all against false, dangerous, or foolish conceptions of Messiah ;
to protest that Messiah was only a teacher, not a prince, not
a divine lawgiver, not a supreme judge sitting on the throne
of God and disposing of men’s eternal destinies.
Nay, why
claim the title Messiah at all, if it could only suggest false
hood ?
Since he sedulously fostered the belief that he was
Messiah j without attempting to define the term) or guide the
�2<
public mind, he could only be understood, and must have
wished to be understood, to present himself as Messiah in the
popular, notorious sense. If he was really this, honour him as
such.
If his claim was delusive, he cannot be held guiltless.
Every high post has its own besetting sin, which must be
conquered by him who is to earn any admiration.
A finance
minister, who pilfers the treasury, can never be honoured as
a hero, whatever the merits of his public measures. 'A states
man or prince, entrusted with the supreme executive power,
ruins his claims to veneration if he use that power violently
to overthrow the laws.
Such as is the crime of a statesman
who usurps a despotism, sttch is the guilt of a religious
teacher who usurps lordship over the taught and aggrandizes
himself.
It is a bottomless gulf of demerit, swallowing up all
possible merit, and making silence concerning him our kindest
course, if only his panegyrists allow us to be silent.
A
teacher who exalts himself into our Lord and Saviour and
Judge, leaves to his hearers no reasonable choice between
two extremes of conduct.
him.
Whoso is not with him is against
For we must either submit frankly to his claims, and
acknowledge ourselves little children—abhor the idea of
criticizing him or his precepts, and in short become morally
annihilated in his presence—or, on the opposite, we cannot
help seeing him to have fallen into something worse than
ignominy.
I digress to remark, that a teacher supposed by us to be
the infallible arbiter of our eternity would detain our minds
for ever in a puerile state if lie taught dogmatically, not to
say imperiously.
If he aimed to elicit our own powers of
�25
judgment, and not to crush, us into submissive imbecility, the
method which Socrates carried to an extreme appears alone
suited to the object; namely, to refrain from expressing his
own decisions, but lay before the hearers the material of
thought half-prepared, and claim of them to combine it into
some conclusion themselves.
In fact, this is fundamentally
the mode in which the Supremely Wise, who inhabits this
infinite world, trains our minds and souls.
His greatness does
not oppress our faculties, because it is ever silent from with
out.
Displaying before us abundantly the materials of judg
ment, he elicits our powers ; never commanding us to become
little children, but always inviting our minds to grow up into,
manhood.
But, if there were also an opposite side of teaching-
healthful to us—if it were well to start from dogmas guaran
teed to us from heaven, which it is impiety to canvas—then
the matter of first necessity would be, that the uttered decrees
to which we are to submit should be free from all enigma, all
extravagance of hyperbole, all parable, dark allusion, and hard
metaphor, all apparent self-contrariety ; and, moreover, that,
we should have no uncertainty what were the teacher’s precise
words, no mere mutilated reports and inconsistent duplicates,
but a reliable genuine copy of every utterance on which there
is to be no criticism.
To sum up, I will say: Nothing can be
less suited to minister the Spirit and train the powers of the
human soul, than to be subject to a superhuman dictation of
truth; and nothing could be more unlike a divine law of the
letter, than the incoherent, hyperbolic, enigmatic, inconsistent
fragments of discourses given to us unauthoritatively as teach
ings of Jesus.
�26
But I return to my main subject.
I have shown what
conclusions seem inevitable, so soon as we cease to believe
that Jesus is the celestial Prince Messiah of the book of
Enoch, popularly expected in his day.
To lay stress on
his possession of this or that gentle and beautiful virtue
is quite away from the purpose.
Let it be allowed that
Luke has rightly added this and that soft touch to the
Let it be granted that the
picture in Matthew and Mark.
nobler as well as the baser side of the Jerusalem church
came direct from Jesus himself.
Whether any of the actual
virtues of European Christians have been kindled from fires
which really burnt in Jesus, it appears to me impossible to
know.
The heart of Paul gushed with the tenderest and
warmest love, and he believed Christ to be its source.
But
the Christ whom he loved to glorify was not the Christ of our
books, which did not yet exist; nor a Christ reported to him
by the Apostles, to whom he studiously refused to listen ; but
the Christ whom he made out in the Messianic Psalms, in
parts of Isaiah, in the apocryphal book called Wisdom, and
perhaps also in the book of Enoch.
With such sources of
meditation and information open, the personal and bodily
existence of Jesus was thought superfluous by a numbei' of
Christians considerable enough to earn denunciations in the
epistles of John.
A great and good man, Theodore Parker,
tells me that'it would take a Jesus to invent a Jesus. I reply,
that, though to invent a Jesus was undoubtedly difficult, to
colour a Jesus was very easy.
The colouring drawn from a
Buffering Messiah was superimposed on Jesus by the perpetual
meditations of the churches, which, after he had disappeared,
�27
sought the Scriptures diligently,
not
to discover whether
Jesus was Messiah, which was already an axiom, but to dis
cover what, and what sort of a person, Messiah was.
Ac
cording as the inquirers studied more in one or in another
book, the conception of Messiah came out different; and here
we have an obvious explanation of the varieties of portrait in
different gospels. The first disciples, who thus by prophetical
*
studies supplemented the dry outlines which alone could be
communicated by the actual hearers of Jesus, would naturally
affix to him many traits not strictly human, nor laudable
except on the theory of his superhuman character.
Never
theless, in a church exalted by moral enthusiasm and self
sacrifice, in which the highest spirits were truly devoted to
practical holiness, it is to be expected that whatever is most
beautiful and tender, pure and good, in the traits of character
which in Isaiah or elsewhere were believed to belong to
Messiah, would be eagerly appropriated to Jesus, as they
evidently were by Paul.
Some of these would be likely to
tinge often-repeated narratives; so that, although none could
invent the outline portrait of Jesus, no difficulty appears in
the way of a theory, that the moral sentiment of the church
has cast a soft halo over a character perhaps rather stem and
ambitious, than discriminating, wise, or tender.
* To my personal knowledge, this is the systematic practice of
Pauline Christians in the present day. They read of Jesus in the
Psalms, ih the Prophets, in the “ types” of Leviticus, in the Song of
Solomon, in the ProVerbs,—anywhere, in short,—with iiiore zeal and
pleasure than in the three gospels. A free instinct guides them to
feed on less stubborn material.
�28
We cannot recover lost history. Into the narratives and dis
courses of Jesus so much of legendary error has crept that we
may write or wrangle about him for ever : Paul is a palpable
and positive certainty.
In what single moral or religious
quality Jesus was superior to Paul, I find myself unable to say.
Is it really a duty incumbent on each of us to decide such
questions ? . Why must the task of awarding the palm of
spiritual greatness among men be foisted into religion ?
It is a fact on the surface of history, that Paul, more than
any one else, overthrew ceremonialism.
Hereby he founded
a religion more expansive than that of Isaiah, and, in his
fond belief, expansive as the human race, as the children of
God.
He was not the first Jew ta propound the nullity of
ceremonies.
If time allowed, that topic might admit in
structive amplification.
The controversy against ceremonies
was inevitable, and, with or without him, must have been
fought out.
What he effected, let us thankfully record; but
.God does not allow us to owe our souls to any one man, as
though he were a fountain of life.
It is an evil thing to call
ourselves a man’s followers, to express devotion to him, and
blazon forth his name.
Every teacher is largely the product
of his age: whatever light and truth he imparts, the glory
of it is due to the Father of Light alone, from whom cometh
down every good and perfect gift.
Any glory for it would
be inexpressibly painful to a true-hearted prophet; I mean,
for instance, to one true-hearted as Paul.
He had no wish
to be called Master, Master.
He could not bear to hear any
one say, “ I am of Paul.”
“ Who then is Paul, and who
Apollos, but ministers by whom ye have believed ?”
What!
�29
when a man believes himself to be the channel by which it has
pleased the Unseen Lord to pour out some portion of hidden
truth for the feeding of hungry souls, can such a one bear to
be praised and thanked for his ministrations ?
Nay, in pro
portion as he knows himself to speak God’s truth by the
impulse of God’s spirit, in the same proportion he feels his
own personality to be annihilated, and he breathes out an
intense desire that God in him may be glorified, but the man
be forgotten.
I say then, let not us thwart and counteract
such yearnings of the simple-hearted instructor.
himself further on this matter.
Hear Paul
“ Let no man glory in men;
for all things are yours : whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas,
or the world or life or death, or things present or things to
come—all are yours.”
He means that the collective children
of God are the end, for whom God has provided teachers as
tools and instruments.
But this is not all.
In proportion as
the teachers are elevated, the taught become unable to judge
of their relative rank in honour. Pauf therefore forbad the.
attempt, and deprecated praise.
“ With me,” he continues,
“ it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or
of man’s judgment; yea, I judge not my own self, but he
that judgeth me is the Lord.
Therefore judge nothing before
the time, until the Lord come ; who both will bring to light
the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the
counsels of hearts; and then shall every man have (his own)
praise of God.”
What else did he mean to say but: Think
not to distribute awards among those to whom you look up.
To graduate the claims of equals and inferiors is generally
more than a sufficient task.
Leave God to pass his awards
�80
on. those who are spiritually above you; who possibly, like
Paul, may receive your praise as painful, and be wholly
unconcerned at your blame.
The glorifying of religious
teachers has hitherto never borne any fruit but canonizations
and deifications, “voluntary humility and worshipping of
messengers,” vain competitions and rival sects ; stagnation in
the letter, quenching of the Spirit.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A discourse against hero-making in religion, delivered in South Place Chapel, Finsbury, April 24th, 1864
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Newman, Francis William [1805-1897.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 30 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: Printed by request, with Enlargements. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Inscription on title page: To M.D. Conway with the writer's kind regards.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Trubner and Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5196
Subject
The topic of the resource
Religion
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A defence of atheism: being a lecture delivered in Mercantile Hall, Boston, April 10, 1861), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Hero-Worship
Jesus Christ
Religion
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1904fcefb34ca0020501b73b8ed9acea.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=q-AEcSl8k0dUhr0RtKyRJOUJYl6C0C4ad-R2zt9lt%7E8O3lEz8kqzrgLSJ7xI9RjdGtrPczEKgCpFeWuyPTlJBlM8mpoMgEoiVPnHpEm7Ke4tiiU9-G6bkOOG3uZbrLF3eKlOw%7E4vJp9DiVXJKTLOQp-YwCZ5ILFLiAi6JbU9y5n8aMbO7qBs1NWLsZGl-c69JIsk8ZgxaxbNWwwoABJwCM5SaGF4XjfBR5-GoM1HXOOgf5UyK5BguKUcA16QbmLrb9bkJ%7EojdaHAI7-GZ39rl59V2GvHdxEDvvpmGoOucsw9NdVlsbonZ6btAYwssso2Y7e-llepvqTzujGnNShD4Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
829a39b0ca123ca533f98bb5c0a788fd
PDF Text
Text
REMARKS
UPON THE
RECENT PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE
OF
ROBERT LORD BISHOP OF CAPETOWN
AND
METROPOLITAN
AT HIS PRIMARY METROPOLITICAL VISITATION OF
THE DIOCESE OF NATAL.
BY THE RIGHT REV.
JOHN WILLIAM COLENSO, D.D.
BISHOP OF NATAL.
LONDON:
LONGMAN, GREEN, LONGMAN, ROBERTS, & GREEN.
1864.
�LONDON
PRINTED BY SPOTTISWOODE AND 00.
NEW-STBBET SQUARE
�CONTENTS.
—♦—
PAGE
.
Occasion of these Remarks............................................................................ 1
Proceedings of the Bishop of Capetown at Durban
....
Proceedings of the Bishop of Capetown at Maritzburg
The Bishop’s Charge; his claim of Jurisdiction
2
...
10
....
15
The Bishop of Capetown’s threatened Secession from the Church of
England
....................................................................................................... 21
The Bishop of Capetown’s stronglanguage............................................. 27
The Bishop of Capetown’sown religious teaching
33
....
The Bishop charges the Bishop of Natal with reckless haste in
publishing...................................................................................................... 38
The Bishop’s personal observations upon the Bishop of Natal
.
.
40
List of Books prepared by the Bishop of Natal for the use of Missionary
Students and Native Scholars................................................................ 46
Another view of the charge of dishonesty............................................. 57
Appendix.
1. Extracts from the Bishop of Natal’s Books .
.
.
.64
(i) On the Fear of Death, from the Commentary on St. Paul’s
Epistle to the Romans, p. 144-7............................................. 64
(ii) On the Reading of the Scriptures, from the Pentateuch
Critically Examined, Part III, p.628-32
...
66
2. Opinions of various 'Writers in the Church of England respecting
the Authorship of the Pentateuch............................................. 69
3. Extracts from the Fathers and others, shewing their views as
to the limitation of our Lord’s knowledge as the Son of Man
79
4. Correspondence of the Bishop of Natal with the Bishop of
Oxford and the -Bishop of Capetown............................................. 81
5. Letters from native converts, received by the Bishop of Natal
while in England......................................................................... 86
6. Proposed alteration of the Supreme Court of Appeal
.
.
94
��REMARKS
^c.
Occasion of these Remarks.
I regret very much that it should be necessary for me to draw
attention again in this way to the proceedings of the Bishop of
Capetown. My respect for his personal character, — no less
than my sense of duty to the high office which he fills,—would
assuredly, under any ordinary circumstances, have constrained
me to keep silence, even though suffering from acts (as it seems
to me) of undue hastiness and precipitancy on his part. But
the present is no ordinary occasion; and the course of conduct
which Bishop Gray has pursued is so strange, that I can only
regard it as a striking instance of the disturbing effect, on the
purest mind, of strong religious and ecclesiastical prejudices.
As the circumstances which have transpired during the last
two months in my distant diocese, though partially reported
from a partizan point of view in certain journals, are probably
unknown to the great mass of English Churchmen,—are cer
tainly unknown to them in their naked simplicity,—and, as
those circumstances are such as to justify fully to my own mind
the present publication,—I have thought it right to place on
record the main facts of the late Metropolitical Visitation of the
Diocese of Natal, as I have gathered them from the colonial
journals, from published documents, and from private com
munications.
It will thus be seen that not merely my own personal interests
are here concerned, but that far graver issues have been raised,
B
�2
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
of vital consequence to the whole National Church,—in fact,
no less than this, whether Her Majesty’s Supremacy shall any
longer be maintained, in matters ecclesiastical affecting the
Clergy of the Church of England, within the Province of Cape
town, and, by inevitable consequence, within the other colonies
of the British Empire, if not, ultimately, within the mother
country itself.
Proceedings of the Bishop of Capetown at Durban.
The following extract from the Natal Mercury of May 3,
1864, will inform the reader as to the circumstances attending
the Bishop of Capetown’s arrival in the colony on this Visita
tion. I may premise that Natal contains, at the present time,
an European population of 13,990 (by the last Blue Booty, of
whom about 10,000 are English. There are only tw.o towns—
Durban, on the coast, which, regarded as a port, is known
commonly as Port-Natal, with a white population of 2,567, and
Maritzburg in the interior, the capital city and seat of govern
ment, with a population of 3,118, and a very small cathedral,
consisting merely of a nave and chancel, and capable of holding,
comfortably seated, about 250 persons. The remainder of this
small European population is scattered about the colony, in
separate farms or small villages, over 18,000 square miles of
country—an area about one-third the size of England and Wales.
Bishop Gray landed at Durban on April 27, and the Mer
cury reports as follows:—
On Sunday last, the 1st of May, the Bishop of Capetown, as Metropolitan
of the Church of England in South Africa, carried out in St. Paul’s Church,
Durban, his expressed intention of ‘deposing ’ the Bishop of Natal from his
office, and of prohibiting him from the exercise of his functions in the
(Metropolitan Province of South Africa.’
As his Lordship’s views were generally understood after his arrival on
Wednesday, and as a large number of Churchmen in Durban held strong
opinions (wholly irrespective of Dr. Colenso’s theological views) regard
ing the illegality of the position taken up by Bishop Gray, as opposed to
Her Majesty’s Letters Patent, the following protest was sent in on Saturday:—
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
3
‘ To the Wardens of St. Paul’s Church, Durban.
April 29, 1864.
‘Gentlemen,—We, the undersigned members of St. Paul’s Church,
Durban, having heard that the Bishop of Capetown intends to pronounce
“ sentence ” or “ judgment ” against the Bishop of Natal, beg most empha
tically to protest against any proceedings which interfere with the authority
of the Bishop of Natal (pending the decision of the Queen in Council),
and tend to disturb the peace and quiet of our Church.
‘ Edward W. Holland
‘ And a number of others.’
To this document [which was handed to him by the Churchwardens]
the Bishop made the following reply :—•
‘Gentlemen,—I beg to acknowledge the receipt of the documents placed
in my hand late on Saturday night. I regret that, when you found that
any members of the Church were disturbed in their minds about the publica
tion of the Sentence delivered in Capetown during Divine Service, you did
not at once communicate with me, and that, when I was anxious, even at
the late hour at which I received the memorial, to discuss the matter, they
declined to accept my invitation. The publication of the Sentence in the
diocese is a mere matter of form; but I am advised that it is essential to its
completeness and validity. It will be published to-day in all the diocese.
I could not revoke the order which I have given as regards St. Paul’s
Church, on the grounds which Dr. Colenso’s friends suggest, without
stultifying my whole proceedings, and acknowledging the right of appeal
to the Privy Council, which I formally repudiated. The appeal to Canter
bury, provided for by the Letters Patent, and which I did recognize, I am
informed by His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury has never been made.
I have already mentioned to you that the Sentence is not one of excom
munication of Dr. Colenso, as one of you informed me was widely believed
to be the case. It is simply the notifying the fact, that the Bishop has not
retracted the opinions which have been condemned, and that the Sentence
of Deprivation, therefore, takes effect. The Judgment itself requires that
this should be done.
‘ It is to me a source of very great regret that any misunderstanding should
have arisen. I have come here at the earnest request of the clergy, who
have all determined never to recognize Dr. Colenso again as their Bishop,
and to take charge, as my office of Metropolitan requires me to do, of a
vacant, distracted diocese, which, as I believe you well know, is rapidly
sinking into a lifeless condition. I am ready to receive your assurance that
very few of the subscribers sympathise with Dr. Colenso’s views : but you
have candidly admitted that the document fbrwarded to me has been got up
by those who have alas! through him been led into unbelief. It is clear
that the subscribers will, unless they disclaim the imputation, be generally
and fairly considered as having adopted the views of those who have been.
B 2
�4
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
forward in the matter. I need scarcely say that it deeply grieves me that,
coming as I do with a sincere desire to help you, and to revive a languishing
Church, my efforts should, as far as your parish is concerned, be greatly
hindered by the misunderstanding which has arisen.
11 remain, Gentlemen,
1 Durban: Sunday morning, May 1st, 1864.’ (Signed) 'R. Capetown.’
On Sunday morning St. Paul’s Church was crowded,—a large number of
attendants of other Churches [i.e. members of other religious bodies] in town
being attracted by the novelty of the proceedings. After the Nicene Creed
was read by the minister of the parish, the Rev. A. W. L. Rivett, the
reverend gentleman proceeded to read the following document. No sooner,
however, had he begun, than several gentlemen (the number of whom is
varyingly stated at from fifteen to forty) got up and left the Church.
*
[Then follows a formal notice, ending with these words :—
'Now, therefore, we do hereby adjudge and decree the sentence so pro
nounced on the Sixteenth of December, One thousand eight hundred and
sixty-three, to be of full force, virtue, and effect, from and after this date;
and we do, accordingly, decree and sentence the said Bishop of Natal to be
deposed from the said office as such Bishop, and prohibited from the exercise
of any divine office within any part of the Metropolitical Province of Cape
town.
' In testimony whereof, &c.
R. Capetown.’]
After the service was over, his Lordship delivered a sermon, which is
variously spoken of by many who heard it, concluding with a vehement ex
hortation upon the unhappy state of things existing in the Church of England
in this diocese.
This Sentence of Deposition will be disregarded by a large body of the
Church of England in this colony, and it is believed that the authorities
will not recognize its validity. This attitude has reference to the civil aspect
of proceedings only, and does not necessarily involve any concurrence in’ the
theological opinions avowed by Bishop Colenso.
There are some points in the above letter of the Metro
politan which may be noticed.
* An anonymous correspondent of the ‘ Guardian ’ states that ‘ a few, who had
come to church in order to leave it when the Bishop entered the pulpit, did so,’
whereas, in fact, they left because the officiating clergyman began to read the
Sentence of Deposition. He speaks also of ‘ home ideas of Church and State
perplexing many minds,’ and of ‘some having prayed his Lordship, the night
before, to stay the Sentence,’ whereas a number of the Laity had ‘ most emphatically
protested' against the Bishop’s proceedings. It will be seen, as we proceed, that
these are but instances of the suppress™ veri, which characterises the communi
cation of this correspondent throughout.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
5
(i) It is not easy to see how the protesters could be quieted
by being told that the publication of the ‘Sentence’ was ‘a
mere matter of form,’ and yet that it was ‘ essential to its com
pleteness and validity.''
(ii) The Bishop says that he had ‘ recognized the appeal to
Canterbury, provided for by the Letters Patent.’ But it must
be observed that he did not recognize it as a right which the
Patent distinctly allowed, but only vouchsafed it as a favour,—
‘ in this particular case, which is in itself novel, and of great importance to
the whole Church.’ See my Letter to the Laity, p.2.
*
(iii) It is impossible to avoid observing the undue pressure,
here put upon the subscribers to the Durban protest,-—which
expressed no more than a simple desire on their parts to await,
as loyal subjects, ‘the decision of the Queen in Council,’—by
the intimation that, if they did not openly ‘ disclaim the im
putation ’ of sympathising with my views, they would be
‘ generally and fairly considered as having adopted them.’
(iv) It was also, as it seems to me, not worthy of the present
grave occasion, to have stigmatized the gentlemen, supposed to
have promoted the address, as ‘ having alas I through him (the
Bishop of Natal) been led into unbelief’—as if no layman in
Natal was capable of forming some judgment for himself, as
educated men do^ upon the relations of Science and Scripture.
(v) If, however, as the Bishop of Capetown assumes, ‘ very
few of the subscribers sympathised with my views,’ there must
be others of the Laity in Natal who do; inasmuch as I received
from them some months ago a hearty expression of good-will, in
an address numerously and respectably signed.
But I desire to draw attention, specially, to the following
two statements which are made in the Bishop’s letter:—* The Bishop (Waldegeave) of Cablisle says in his recent Charge,—
‘ There has been on the part of the Bishop of Capetown a resolve,—in the carrying
out of which he has received no little encouragement from the authorities, both
civil and ecclesiastical, at home, and also, of late, from his own Suffragans on th e
spot,—to vindicate for himself a Metropolitical Jurisdiction, independent, as far
as possible, of that of the See of Canterbury.’
�6
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
The Bishop says—
I could not revoke the order,—[which had been issued for the publi
cation of this ‘ Sentence ’ in St. Paul’s Church,]—without stultifying
my whole proceedings, and acknowledging the right of Appeal to the Privy
Council, which I had formally repudiated.
It should be observed that I have not appealed to the Privy
Council, but to Her Majesty Herself as Head of the Church of
England, who has exercised Her constitutional right in this
matter, and referred my petition to the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council.
But again the Bishop says—
I have come here at the earnest request of the clergy, who have all deter
mined never to recognize Dr. Colenso again as their Bishop.
This was a very grave statement for him to have made on an
occasion like the present: and I must think that it ought not
to have been made by the Metropolitan, without the most
perfect certainty that it expressed the actual state of the case.
No sanguine expectations of his own,—no mere assurances of
eager and excited partizans,—as to what was, or would be, the
state of feeling among the clergy,-—could have justified, as
it seems to me, so strong an assertion,—nothing but the fact,
that he had actually received such a ‘ request,’ and an expression
of such a ‘determination,’ from all the clergy—from all, at
least, who were in the colony, and accessible.
But how stands the fact ? The total number of the clergy
in the diocese is, as stated by the correspondent of the Guardian.,
June 27, at this time eleven,—besides two now in England, and
two engaged as Missionaries, beyond the border of the colony,
in Zululaud. And by the previous mail I was made aware that
this statement was certainly not correct, so far as three, at
all events, of those eleven clergy were concerned. I very much
doubt, also, if, at that time, all even of the remaining eight
had expressed any such a determination. But the following
letter from one of the clergy in question, which appeared in the
Natal Mercury of May 19, 1864, will speak for itself:—
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
7
To the Editor of the ‘ Natal Mercury.'
Sir,—Tn the Bishop of Capetown's letter to some of the inhabitants of
Durban, dated May 1st, appears the following- statement:—11 have come
here at the earnest request of the clergy, who have all determined never to
recognize Dr. Colenso again as their Bishop.’
Allow me to state through your journal that I am not aware of having
joined in that request, or expressed any such determination.
If the ‘ Privy Council,’ to which Dr. Colenso has appealed, recognize
him as the lawful Bishop of Natal, I will do the same, or return my license.
No real good can be effected by disobeying the law, or disregarding the
highest civil authority in the land. And I hope, therefore, that some, at
least, of my brother clergymen will pause before they lend themselves to
any course of action, which in future they may have reason to regret.
We need not fear the result of investigation and criticism : for the doc
trines of the Church, and the teaching of the Bible, have a solid foundation ;
and, when the storm has past, and the dust subsided, we shall see the truth
even more clearly than before. 1 If this Council or this work be of man, it
will come to nought; but, if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it.’
I hope you will publish this without delay, as an accident, which I met
with a few days back, made me unable to attend to' it earlier.
Umgababa Mission Station,
I remain, Sir, yours, &c.,
Umkomazi, May 7, 1864.
A. Tonnesen.
The anonymous correspondent of the Guardian writes of
the above clergyman as follows :—
One [of the clergy], unhappily, did withdraw himself from his brethren,—
not, it is said, because he has been drawn away from the truth, but on some
extreme views of Church and State;—
that is to say, he still clings, it seems, to the good old English
Protestant principle, of recognizing the Queen as supreme in
all matters within her realm, spiritual as well as temporal, and
of regarding it as the first duty of an Englishman, whether
clergyman or layman, to render obedience to the law.
But, it is added by the same authority, this clergyman ‘ has
since, we hear, come in.’ This means that he has been obliged
to succumb, to some extent, under the heavy pressure brought
to bear upon him, and has published in his church, by the com
mand of the Metropolitan, the ‘ Sentence of Deposition,’ which
he had at first refused to do. I have reason to know that the
following arguments, among others, have been used to produce
this effect with him, and, possibly, with others of my clergy
�8
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
(i) That they are wrong in disobeying the Metropolitan^—
(ii) That the sentence is a spiritual sentence, which does not fall under
the jurisdiction of the ‘ Privy Council,’—
(iii) That the Bishop of Natal had not appealed, and, therefore, they
had no right to assume that, as a ground for any opposition,—
(iv) If they would not obey the Metropolitan, their licenses would be with
drawn, and their names struck off the list of the Gospel-Propagation Society.
This, then, is the process by which dissentients are to be
eliminated or coerced, and the unanimity of the clergy is to be
secured in this matter ! With respect to the arguments brought
thus to bear upon them, I may remark as follows:—
(i) The clergy of Natal would have been perfectly justified
in disobeying the command of the Metropolitan,—as Mr. Long
was in disobeying that of Dr. Gray as Bishop,—if they deemed
it unlawful, and were prepared to take the consequences of dis
obedience. But, being ignorant themselves of the real facts of
the case, and having before them only the positive statements
of the Metropolitan,—not corrected by the information, which
my published ‘ Letter to the Laity of Natal ’ would have given
them, had it by that time reached the colony,—I cannot wonder
at the course which for the present the majority have taken.
(ii) The idea, that the Bishop of Capetown’s sentence,
being a ‘spiritual’ sentence only, will, therefore, ‘not fall
under the jurisdiction of the Privy Council,’ will, I apprehend,
be found to be a fallacy. The 36th Canon says distinctly:—
The King’s Maj esty, under God, is the only supreme Governor of this
realm, and of all other His Highness’s dominions and countries, as well in
all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal.
If the Bishop had first resigned his Patent, he might issue,
no doubt, sentences of deposition and bulls of excommuni
cation, as a Bishop of the ‘ Church of South Africa,’ fortified
by the ‘ Canons of Antioch, confirmed by the General Council
of Chalcedon,’ as quoted in p.29 of his recent Charge. And
such proceedings would certainly not be referred by Her
Majesty to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. But
they would be as harmless, and would as little trouble our
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
9
peace and order, as Members of the Church of England, as if
they were issued by a Roman Catholic Bishop, or by the Greek
Patriarch, or by the Pope himself,—by whom indeed, speaking
in the name of all £ the Churches of the Roman obedience,’
(Charge, p.4), the Bishop himself is, at this very time, con
demned of schism and heresy, and excommunicated.
But, so long as the Bishop of Capetown holds Her Ma
jesty’s Letters Patent, he is, I apprehend, responsible to the
Queen Herself for using the powers committed to him, whether
spiritual or temporal, in relation to any of the Queen’s subjects,
rightfully and lawfully. Otherwise it is plain that, by means
of this new device of a distinction between 4 spiritual ’ and
‘ temporal ’ judgments, (long ago used in defence of the
Inquisition,) he might use his high office to condemn with
a 6 spiritual sentence,’—to place under the ban and excom\nunicate, and so virtually deprive of his ministry,—any one
of\his own clergy, without being liable to have his proceedings\brought under review, as they were in Mr. Long’s case,
before yhe Civil Courts of the colony, and finally before the
Queen in Council.
(iii) I regret that any of my clergy should have been misled by the statement that I had not appealed,—a statement
which, under the circumstances, would be naturally understood
to mean that I was not intending, and had taken no steps, to
test- the legality of the Bishop’s proceedings. I had, however,
given formal notice of my intention to do this; and it was
perfectly well known that I was seeking to obtain a judicial
decision upon the case from the highest Court of Justice in the
Realm. But the Bishop of Capetown has moved so precipi
tately in the matter, that there was no time for me to receive
even a reply, as to the advice which would be tendered to Her
Majesty with respect to my petition, before he proceeded to
carry out his Sentence in Natal.
(iv) Such arguments as these, which threaten to take away
�10
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
a man’s means of livelihood, or in well-known Zulu phrase to
‘ eat him up,’ for disobedience, must often be irresistible,—
especially when coupled with positive assertions, as above,
with respect to the extent of the Metropolitan’s jurisdiction,
and his independence of control. Yet the threat held out—
of striking off the Missionary’s name from the list of the Pro
pagation Society, if he refused obedience to such a command
of the Metropolitan—was, in fact, not justified by any vote of
the Society, empowering the Bishop to pledge it to this course
of proceeding, as a means of coercion in such a case. On
the contrary, it is well known that, when the Bishop recently
applied to the Society to grant him virtually such a power, the
request was refused, in a great measure through the sound
advice of some eminent laymen.
In fact, it is plain that, under the arrangement desired
by the Bishop of Capetown, the Society’s funds would be em
ployed to support the system,—not of the ‘ Church of England,’
which it is generally understood to represent, but—of the
‘ Church of South Africa.,’ which, in the language of the Bishops
meeting in Synod at Capetown, while ‘receiving ’ the Articles
and Formularies of the Church of England,—
is not bound by any interpretations put upon those standards by existing
Ecclesiastical Courts in England, or by the decisions of such courts in matters
of faith.
Proceedings of the Bishop of Capetown at Maritzburg.
The Bishop, having concluded his Visitation at Durban,
proceeded to Maritzburg, and there, on May 18, delivered a
‘ Charge ’ in the Cathedral Church (which shall be considered
presently)—after which the clergy then present, who appear to
have been nine in number, signed and presented the following
Address, drawn up probably by the correspondent of the
Guardian, with the view of its being signed by all the
clergy: —
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
11
To the Most Reverend the Lord Metropolitan of South Africa.
My Lord,—We, the clergy of the Church of England in the diocese of
Natal, assembled in the cathedral church of Pietermaritzburg, to confer with
your Lordship on the present state of the diocese, desire to express our deep
sympathy with your Lordship in the painful duty you have been called upon
to perform in sitting on judgment upon Bishop Colenso, and gratitude for
the fatherly care and help your Lordship has extended towards this portion
of your province, in the perplexities and trials to which it has been sub
jected. We would also place on solemn record our emphatic repudiation of
the erroneous teaching of Bishop Colenso, and our conviction that, should
it please Gon, for the chastisement of our sins, to allow Bishop Colenso to
return to the diocese with legal authority, he must still be regarded as
lying under a righteous sentence of condemnation, and that we dare not
acknowledge him as having authority in spiritual matters.
We would further beg to be allowed to offer your Lordship our most
grateful thanks for the Charge your Lordship has delivered to us in this
cathedral this day, and pray your Lordship to permit it to be printed, that
it may be in the hands of every member of our flock, and to allow the MS.
to be placed among the archives of this diocese.
St. Peter’s Cathedral, Pietermaritzburg, 18th May, 1864.
The above was signed by 1 the Dean,’ and eight other clergy.
Among the above signatures is that of one of the Missionaries
in Zululand ; and, accordingly, the informant of the Guardian
writes—
You will remark that, whilst I give the numbers of the clergy as eleven,
there are but eight signatures to the Address.
One clergyman is in
England; another, having broken a blood-vessel, is lying ill in bed, but
is well known to believe (s«c).
Thus this address has been signed by eight colonial clergy,
of whom several are catechists, who have been ordained by myself.
And these have been permitted by the Metropolitan—nay, en
couraged, if not, in some instances, virtually commanded and
compelled, to give their judgment on these great questions of
the day, and pronounce condemnation on their own Bishop, who
at any rate has been to some of them a Father in God, from
whose hands they have received ^ordination. If it had been
signed by all the clergy of such a diocese as that of Natal, it
is obvious that the weight to be attached to such a document
would have been incomparably less than would belong to a like
declaration, if made by the majority of the clergy of an English
�12
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
diocese. And the value even of such signatures has been
recently set very low by the Bishop of St. David’s.
The Bishop of Capetown replied as follows:—
Deanery, Maritzburg, May 19, 1864.
Reverend and Dear Brethren,—I beg to thank you very sincerely for your
Address. The duty, which I have had to discharge, has been a most pain
ful one. All personal considerations, however, must give way, when the
faith of Christ is at stake. The questions, which your late Bishop has
raised, are, as I have said in my Charge, no less than these,—Is there a
written revelation from God ? Is our Lord, God Incarnate ? Is Chris
tianity true ?
We ought not to suppose for a moment that any Civil Court would, if
appealed to on the question of civil right, venture to send back to this land
one, whose teaching you yourselves, with the whole Church, have solemnly
repudiated, with the right to take possession of the property of the Church,
given for far different purposes ; nor do I imagine that anyone would have
thought it possible, had it not been for the confident tone of Dr. Colenso
himself, assuring those to whom he had written that such was about to be
the case.
It rejoices me, my brethren, to receive from yourselves the assurance that,
let the worldly position of Dr. Colenso be what it may, you ‘ dare not
acknowledge him as having authority in spiritual matters.’ Maintain your
ground as witnesses for Christ, and for ‘ the faith once for all delivered to
the Saints,’ and, in God’s good time, all will be well. Our country’s Courts
will not commit the great wrong of giving a legal right to a bishop, deposed
and rejected by the Church, to force himself into your churches, and pro
claim from your pulpits ‘ erroneous and strange doctrines, contrary to God’s
Word,’ which he and you have sworn at your ordination ‘ with all faithful
diligence to banish and drive away,’ and thereby to compel your congregations,
—who, I rejoice to hear, have no more sympathy than yourselves with the
late Bishop’s teaching,—to abandon the churches which they have erected
for themselves.
But, if it were so, your course is plain. Christians have, before now,
been driven to worship on the mountain-top or by the river-side, in dens
and caves of the earth. I believe there is faith and zeal enough among
yourselves, if driven to it, to do the same.
I shall have much pleasure in complying with your wish, by publishing
my Charge, and by placing the MS. afterwards at your disposal.
I am, Rev. and Dear Brethren,
Your faithful servant and brother in Christ,
R. Capetown, Metropolitan.
The Rev. the Clergy of the Diocese of Natal.
A similar document, almost the counterpart of the chief
clause in the clerical ‘ declaration,’ was subsequently signed by
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
13
the same nine clergymen as before, and also by seven laymen
—six signing as churchwardens of four churches, but signing in
their own names merely, without the authority of the congre
gations.
It is obvious to remark how positively in his reply, as
above,-—and we shall see that he does the same in his Charge,—
the Metropolitan reiterates the statement, that e the whole
Church has solemnly repudiated my teaching,’ that ‘ I have
been deposed and rejected by the ChurchC But he must have
*
been aware that my books have never been condemned at all
by the whole Church, or by any competent authority in the
Church of England, and that not a few of the clergy of that
Church, and a very large body of the more intelligent laity,
are so far from condemning me, that they have openly come
forward to declare their disapproval of his proceedings.
Further, I maintain, as I have partly shown in my ‘ Letter to
the Laity,’ p. 10-14, that all the charges brought against me at
my (so-called) ‘ Trial ’ will fall to the ground by virtue of recent
decisions in this country, some in consequence of recent Judg
ments of the Privy Council, others by reason of a decision in
the Court of Arches—the very Court of the Archbishop of
Canterbury, under whose ‘general superintendence and revision’
the Bishop of Capetown bound himself to act, in accepting his
Letters Patent from the Crown,—which decision, however, he
distinctly repudiates, see Trial, p.388, declaring positively that
he ‘ cannot concur ’ in it, and presuming to say that ‘ it is a
wrong to the Church ’ of which he is still content to remain a
Bishop.
With respect to the ‘ questions,’ which, as the Bishop of
* Of the ‘ nearly fifty ’ clergy in the diocese of Capetown, very many of them
selected or ordained by the Bishop himself, about one-third do not appear to have
signed the ‘Declaration’ of ‘rejection,’ lately published in the Times, Sept.l. But
the signatures to this Declaration do not profess to be those of Clergy of the Church
of England, but of Clergy ‘ ministering in the Church in South Africa,' and they
address, accordingly, the ‘ Bishops of the Church in South Africa.’
�14
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
Capetown says, ‘ I have raised,’ or which, as he says elsewhere,
Charge, p.14, ‘have really been raised by my writings,’ I cannot
be responsible for inferences, which he or others may think
proper to draw from my critical conclusions. I must refer the
reader to the books themselves for the statements which I have
really made; but I emphatically deny that I myself have
raised these ‘ questions.’ On the contrary—
(i) I have said of the Bible, Part I.p.13, that it has—
‘through God’s providence, and the special working of His Spirit on the
minds of its writers, been the means of revealing to us His True Name, the
Name of the only Living and True God, and has all along been, and, as far
as we know, will never cease to be, the mightiest instrument in the hand of
the Divine Teacher, for awakening in our minds just conceptions of His
character and of His gracious and merciful dealings with the children of
men. Only we must not attempt to put into the Bible what we think ought
to be there,. . . and lay it down for certain beforehand, that God could only
reveal Himself by means of an infallible book.’
(ii) I have done my utmost to show, Part I.p.xxix-xxxii,
Part II.p.xv,xvi, Part Ill.p.xxxiii-xl, that the recognition of the
results of the criticism of the Pentateuch ‘ is perfectly consis
tent with the most entire and sincere belief in our Lord’s
Divinity,’—whereas Bishop Gbay’s view seems to lose sight of
the human nature of our Lord altogether, or to trench on the
Eutychian and Monophysite heresies, which confounded the
two natures in one.
(iii) I fully believe in the Divine origin of Christianity,
—not certainly of that Christianity, which may be blown away
by a breath, which teaches that ‘all our hopes for eternity are
taken from us,’ if one line in Esther or Chronicles is shown to
be unhistorical or untrue, whose ‘ foundation ’ is the dogma,
that ‘ the whole Bible is the unerring Word of the Living God,’
—but a Christianity rooted and grounded in those ‘words of
Christ’ — ‘the primal, indefeasible truths of Christianity,’ as
Dean Milman calls them,— ‘ which shall not pass away,’ — a
Christianity which at once satisfies the deep wants and longings
of the human heart, and is confirmed, as of Divine original, py
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
15
the whole course of human history,—a Christianity, to use again
the words of the same writer, which is 4 comprehensive, all-em
bracing, catholic, which knows what is essential to religion, what
is temporary and extraneous to it,’ and, being such, ‘ may defy
the world.’
And let me say further, it is not I who have said that Chris
tianity will not bear a close and critical investigation, that it
will not endure the searching eye of ‘ free enquiry.’ I believe
that it will, that it is essentially and eternally true. But I do
not believe that all is true, which ancient or modern dogmatisers
have asserted to be essential to the creed of Christendom, and by
which they always obscure, and not unfrequently put out of sight
altogether, the grand truths, which alone are ‘ indefeasible ’
and imperishable. I hold with Bishop Thirlwall, Charge,
p.123, that—
The numbers, migrations, wars, battles, conquests, and reverses of Israel
have nothing in common with the teaching of Christ, with the way of sal
vation, with the fruits of the Spirit. They belong to a totally different
order of subjects. They are not to be confounded with the spiritual revela
tion contained in the Old Testament, much less with that fulness of grace
and truth which came by Jesus Christ. . . . Such questions must be left to
every one’s private judgment and feeling, which have the fullest right to
decide for each, but not to impose their decisions as the dictate of an infal
lible authority on the consciences of others. Any attempt to erect such
facts into articles of faith would be fraught with danger of irreparable evil
to the Church, as well as with immediate hurt to numberless souls.
The Bishop’s Charge; his claim, of Jurisdiction.
I come now to consider the Bishop of Capetown’s Charge,
which is described by the correspondent of the Guardian as—•
the greatest, some say who know England well, that had ever been delivered
by an English Bishop.
In the first portion of it, p.1-12, the Bishop states his views as
to the office and powers of a Metropolitan.
These I need not
here consider at length, as these points, no doubt, will come
under discussion when my case is heard, as Her Majesty has
ordered, by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. I
�16
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
remark only that I have no concern with, and do not in any
manner recognize, the powers of a Metropolitan, as they may
have existed at some time or other in the ancient Catholic
Church, or as they may now exist ‘in the Churches of the
Roman obedience,’ in which latter, says the Bishop, p.14—
since the Council of Trent, the powers of the Metropolitan, as well as
those of the Episcopate generally, have been, to a very great extent, merged
in the Papacy.
I recognize them only so far as they exist in ‘the United Church
of England and Ireland, as by law established,’ in which, as is
well known, the supreme powers, usurped by the Pope in the
Roman Church, are restored by the Constitution to the Crown.
And I note that the Bishop has entirely ignored the Act of
Submission of the Clergy, 25 Henry VIII, which surrenders
all those powers to the Sovereign, with respect to which Mr.
A. J. Stephens says, Laws relating to the Clergy, i.p.23 :—
The grand rupture [with Rome] happened in the reign of Henry VIII,
when all the jurisdiction usurped by the Pope in matters ecclesiastical was
restored to the Crown, to which it originally belonged, so that the statute
25 Hen. VIII was but declaratory of the ancient law of the realm.
I may observe, however, that the Bishop repeats on p.8
the assertion, which I have already been obliged to contradict
on p.6 of my ‘ Letter to the Laity ’; for he says—
Your late Bishop, who had for years recognized my jurisdiction, as has been
abundantly shown by the documents produced at his Trial, denied on that un
happy occasion that I had any jurisdiction over him, and protested against
the exercise of it.
I have shown in my Letter—
(i) That I have never recognized in the Bishop of Capetown
any jurisdiction over me personally, though I have recognized
his Metropolitan dignity, as my Patent requires me to do, in
accordance with the system of the Church of England; that is,
I have recognized (i) his preeminence and precedence as that of
a Bishop primus inter pares, (ii) the right of any one of my
clergy, who may deem himself aggrieved by any of my decisions,
to appeal to him as Metropolitan ;
.,
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
17
(ii) That the documents produced at my so-called ‘Trial’
do not imply any recognition of the jurisdiction which he
now claims over me as Metropolitan;
(iii) That the Bishop of Capetown himself, only a few years
ago, was then, as he expressed himself,—
in doubt as to the extent of Metropolitan jurisdiction.
By this time, I hope, my ‘ Letter to the Laity ’ may have
cleared up this matter of jurisdiction to the minds of many of
my Clergy and Laity. In the absence of any such correcting
influence, I cannot wonder that they should have been much
impressed by the positive statements of the Metropolitan, and
by his language at p.8—
If Dr. Colexso claims to be Bishop over the Clergy and Laity of this
diocese, he can scarcely question my authority over him. We derived our
respective jurisdictions from the same source.
I have shown in my^ Letter,’ p.5, that in my Patent, which
is of an earlier date than that of the Bishop of Capetown, I am
placed by the Crown in the same relation to him as Metropolitan,
that any one of the Suffragans of the Province of Canterbury
stands in to the Archbishop of that Province. And if, as I am
advised, the office of a Metropolitan in England involves no right
or power to exercise an irresponsible jurisdiction over a Suffragan,
without any right of appeal to the Sovereign, then neither has
the Bishop of Capetown any such right or power over me, nor
could such a power have been given him by the later Patent
which he has received.
The Bishop, however, says, p.6—
There remain the facts, that, if the Church; and Crown united in the
appointment of a Bishop, they were united also in the appointment of a
Metropolitan,—that, if one office exists, the other exists also,—and that each
of the eight South African Bishops, that have been appointed since tfie
Province was formed, solemnly swore before God that he would render
canonical obedience to me as Metropolitan at his consecration.
I have already shown, ‘ Letter to the Laity,’ p.4, that according
c
�18
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
to the principle laid down by the Privy Council in Long v.
Bishop of Capetown, viz.—
the oath of canonical obedience does not mean that the clergyman will
obey all the commands of the Bishop against which there is no law, but that
he will obey all such commands as the Bishop by law is authorized to impose,__
I am not bound by this oath to any obedience, except to such
commands of the Metropolitan as he may be lawfully empowered
to impose. And while I recognize his e dignity ’ as Metropolitan,
I deny that he is ‘ by law authorized ’ to summon me before him,
and sit in judgment upon me.
Moreover, that the dignity of Metropolitan may exist, without
his having any lawful jurisdiction, is plain from the following
letter, which has been recently addressed by the Duke of New
castle, as Secretary of State for the Colonies, to the GrovernorCreneral of Canada.
Downing Street, 10th February, 1864.
My Lord,—A Correspondence, which arose out of the recent case of
Long v. The Bishop of Capetown, has led me to submit, for the opinion of
the Law-Officers of the Crown, the question whether any, and, if so, what,
Metropolitan preeminence or jurisdiction was conveyed by the Letters
Patent bearing date the 12th Feb. 1862, which constituted the Bishop of
Montreal Metropolitan Bishop in the Province of Canada,
The following is the answer which I have received:—
4 We think it was competent to the Crown to constitute his Lordship a
Metropolitan, and thereby to give him gyreewiinence and precedence over his
Suffragans, but that, as to the coercive jurisdiction which the Metropolitan,
may exercise, and the manner in which it is to be exercised, these are
matters which must be settled by the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the
Church in a general Assembly of the Province, according to the provision
of the local Act of the Canadian Legislatru-e, 19 & 20 Victoria, cap. 121.’
You will be good enough to communicate a copy of this opinion to the
Bishop of Montreal, adding, that it will be for his Lordship, in concert
with the other authorities of the Canadian Church, to determine for them-’
selves whether they would prefer to apply for fresh and amended Letters
Patent, or to allow the existing instrument to remain in force, with the
knowledge that, so far as it assumes to invest the Metropolitan with coercive
jurisdiction, it is of no effect.
I have, &c.,
(Signed)
Newcastle.
It will be observed that the Patent of the Bishop of Montreal
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
19
did profess to give him, as Metropolitan, a power of e juris
diction,’—probably in the very same terms as those used in the
Bishop of Capetown’s. But this part of his Patent is pro
nounced invalid, by reason of rights already existing. And
the Metropolitan of Canada has only 4 preeminence and pre
cedence ’ over the other Bishops of his Province—he is primus
inter pares—but cannot exercise any jurisdiction over them.
I believe that precisely the same state of things exists in the
Province of Capetown, and that this will be made plain by the
decision of the Privy Council upon the hearing of my case.
What would be thought, however,—or what would be said
and done,—if the Bishop of Montreal were to throw to the
winds this opinion of the Law-Officers of the Crown, and, in
defiance of the Royal authority, were to assert, with the Bishop
of Capetown, that, in the exercise of what he pretends to call a
spiritual jurisdiction, he will proceed to summon, convict, sus
pend, deprive, any one of his Suffragans—e.g. the Bishop of
Heron,—and ‘should he presume to exercise Episcopal func
tions in his diocese, after the sentence of the Metropolitan shall
have been notified to him,’ will further proceed, ‘after due
admonition, to pronounce the formal sentence of excommunica
tion against him’ ? I apprehend that, in such a case, the LawOfficers of the Crown would have another duty to perform, and
would vindicate in due course Her Majesty’s Supremacy.
But the Bishop of Capetown lays great stress upon the
point that the Church, as well as the Crown, has conferred on
him his office as Metropolitan, and from the former he seems to
derive his 4 spiritual jurisdiction.’ But how has 4 the Church ’
done this ? The Bishop says, p.5—
The subject was fully discussed at a meeting of the English Bishops, and.
such of the Colonial Bishops as were within reach, summoned by the late
Archbishop of Canterbury in 1853. At that meeting, at which I was pre
sent, it was resolved that Metropolitans should be at once appointed over
the churches of Canada, New Zealand, South Africa (Australia and the Hast
Indies being already under Metropolitans); and the concurrence and joint,
c 2
�20
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
action of the Crown in this matter was sought and obtained. The Crown
gave what force of law it was in its power to do to the decision of the Church.
• • • By the concurrent action of the Church and of the Crown, and, at their
united call, I hold the office which I now fill.
It is obvious to ask, by what concurrent action of the Church
and State were the Metropolitans of Australia and India
appointed, previously to this meeting of the Bishops ? Here,
however, a resolution of certain Bishops is spoken of as a
‘ decision of the Church ’! to which the Crown ‘gave what force
of law it was in its power to do’! Convocation had no voice in
the matter: the Laity were not consulted: only a private
conclave of Bishops, English and some Colonial, c resolved ’ that
‘Metropolitans should be at once appointed,’ and then ‘the
concurrence and joint action of the Crown in this matter was
sought and obtained.’ And this is called ‘the action of the
Church ’I I leave Archdeacon Denison to settle this matter
with the Bishop of Capetown. But I maintain—and the Duke of
Newcastle’s letter abundantly shows it—that the Crown alone
appointed these Metropolitans.
The Bishop again observes, p.10—
It is the Canons, which define the relations of the Priest and Deacon to
the Bishop, of the Bishop to the Metropolitan, of the Metropolitan to the
Primate and at present, it would seem, the de facto Patriarch of all
Churches of the English Communion.
And then he proceeds to speak of the authority given him as
Metropolitan by the ‘Canons of the Church.’ Not a word,
however, is said in the Canons of the Church of England as to
the relations of the Bishop to the Metropolitan, or of the
Metropolitan to the Primate or Patriarch; nor are even the
names of Metropolitan, Primate, Patriarch, so much as men
tioned in any one of them. And, further, the appeal from the
Archbishop of York is not to the Archbishop of Canterbury as
‘ Patriarch,’ but to the ‘ Queen in Council.’ The Bishop refers,
no doubt, to certain ancient Canons, which, however, have no
force in the Church of England, except that, as Lord Hale says,
in Stephens, Laws relating to the Clergy, i.p.225,—
�THE BISHOP OP CAPETOWN.
21
So far as such, laws are received and allowed of here, so far they obtain,
and no farther.
And this is made still more plain by Lord Denman, as quoted
in Stephens, ii.p.1449 :—
I think it necessary to reassert, what has so often been declared by our
illustrious predecessors in this Court, and by the greatest writers on the
English constitution, that the Canon Law forms no part of the law of Eng
land, unless it has been brought into use and acted upon in this country.
Hence I am of opinion that the burden of proof rests on those, who affirm the
adoption of any portion of it in England.
But the hearer or reader of the Bishop’s words, if ignorant
of ecclesiastical matters, would be misled by the context, and
suppose that he was speaking of the Canons of the English
Church, since the next preceding sentence of the Charge runs
thus—
They [English Churchmen, who go out as colonists] carry with them
their Bible and their Prayer-book, and with them the laws of their Church
embodied in the Canons, so far as these are applicable to their new circum
stances. It is the Canons which define, &c.,—
that is to say, in two successive clauses, the Bishop uses the
expression c the Canons ’ in two totally different senses !
The Bishop goes on to assure my Flock that the Law-Officers
of the Crown were e not likely to consent ’ to advise Her Majesty
to refer my case to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
—that the Queen could only do so 4 by a stretch of Her pre
rogative,’ p.ll,—that this would be—
in fact, to revive the Courts of Preview, Star Chamber, and High Commission, with all their arbitrary powers.
The only answer to these assertions is the fact, that Her
Majesty, by the advice of Her Privy Council, has so referred it,
and, in so doing, has exercised an unquestionable right, derived
from the first principles of our Protestant Constitution.
The Bishop of Capetozvris threatened Secession from the
Church of England.
But should Her Majesty, acting upon the advice that may be
tendered by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, be
�22
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
pleased to decide in my favour, it appears that the Bishop of
Capetown contemplates in that case a formal secession from the
Church of England. His language on this point is most remark
able, and cannot, as it appears to me, be understood to mean
anything short of this.
The fear is expressed, that a Civil Court might send back Dr. Colenso as
Bishop of this Diocese, because there is no legal power in the Metropolitan
to deprive him. The question, however, is, not whether there is a legal
power, i.e. a power conferred by some civil law—[in other words, a power
conferred by Her Majesty’s Letters Patent],—but whether there is any right
in the Metropolitan to deprive, and whether I am Metropolitan. I have shown
above that, by the joint action of the Church and the State, I am Metro
politan, and that the Metropolitan has power by the laws of the Church
[what Church ?] to deprive. I do not believe that any Civil Court would
deny this; because, first, by so doing it would declare that the Church, or,
if the term is preferred, the ‘voluntary association,’ in this country, called
the Episcopal Communion, is the only religious association, or the only
society in the land of any kind, that cannot remove an unfaithful officer
from his office : for, if the Metropolitan, with the aid of the other Bishops
of the Province, cannot do it, no power on earth can. The Archbishop of
Canterbury cannot do so. The Crown cannot. Were a Bishop to become
an Atheist, or were he to believe in Mahomet, or to teach all Roman doc
trine, it would by such a sentence be affirmed that there is no redress, no
power of removal, pp. 12,13.
Let us stop here for a moment, and consider the statement
which I have above italicized, and in which lies the Bishop’s
whole misapprehension of his position. He asserts that the
Crown cannot remove a Bishop: I am advised that the Crown
can remove a Bishop, and that no other power in the Church
of England can. Here, then, is the true remedy for the present
supposed grievance. The Queen, by and with the advice of
Her Privy Council, can cancel my Patent, or, if necessary,
can cancel that of the Bishop of Capetown. If, then, as it is
asserted, I have transgressed so grievously—nay, if I have
transgressed at all—the laws of the Church of England, it is
perfectly competent for the Bishops of Capetown and Grahamstown, or any Bishops of England my accusers, to make their
complaint to Her Majesty, and seek redress at Her hands ; they
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
23
may present, as I myself have done, a petition to be heard
before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, or any
other Court which Her Majesty may see good to appoint, while
accusing me of serious derelictions of duty, in the discharge
of the high office which I hold by Her Majesty’s authority. I
call upon them solemnly to do this, and not to persist in the
unjustifiable practice of uttering abusive and, in fact, libellous
invectives against me. I will put no obstacles in the way of such
an enquiry: I will raise no technical objections, nor interpose
unnecessary delays. But, if they refuse to do this, then let them
hold their peace as to the point, of my having broken faith
with the Church of England, and violated her laws. Or, if they
reject Her Majesty's Supremacy, and desire to shake off the
control of those wholesome laws, which protect the clergy of the
Church of England from the grinding oppression of mere eccle
siastical domination, then let this purpose be distinctly avowed,
and so we shall understand more clearly the end which is aimed
at, and the nature of the conflict in which we are engaged.
But the Bishop proceeds, p.13—
And, next, it would thereby declare that the Church in this colony,
which is a branch of the oldest Corporation of the world, shall not be
governed by its own laws,—laws which it inherits from the Church from
which it derives its origin. I will not believe that any Civil Court on
earth would so openly violate the religious liberties of any denomination of
Christians.
Here, again, is the same fallacy as before. If the Bishop of
Capetown will surrender his Letters Patent, and, with any of
the Clergy or Laity, who are willing to secede with him from
the ‘ Church of England,’ will form another Church—to be
called, e.g. ‘the Church of South Africa, in union and full
communion with the United Church of England and Ireland,’—
and to be modelled (if they desire it) after that of some ancient
Church, with a complete mediaeval system of ecclesiastical tra
ditions, Priestly Authority, Episcopal and Metropolitan Courts,
exercising jurisdiction over clergy and laity, issuing sentences of
�24
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
suspension and deprivation for the former, and decrees of
excommunication for both,—there is nothing to prevent their
so doing: no Civil Court would interfere with them, or e violate
the liberties ’ of such an 4 association.’ But he cannot, I appre
hend, retain his status as a Bishop of the Church of England,
and then renounce the system of that Church, which rightly or
wrongly—most rightly, as I believe, though the Bishop of Cape
town seems to think otherwise—declares by the 37th Article
and the 36th Canon, that—
the Queen’s Majesty under God is the only supreme governor of this realm,
and of all other Her Highness’s dominions and countries, as well in all spi
ritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal.
The Bishop still proceeds, p.13—
But, if it did, it would only deprive the Church of its property. It
could not give spiritual authority to any man. Christ has not given this
power to Kings or Civil Courts. He has given it only to His Church: and,
if any Church were to surrender this power to Civil Courts, it would un
Church itself—cease to he a Church.
But the Church of England notoriously asserts that to the
Queen in Council rightfully Belongs the power of allowing or
disallowing the judgments, which may have been passed by
Archbishops and Bishops upon their clergy ; nor does it recog
nize the distinction, which the Bishop of Capetown attempts to
draw, between their 4 spiritual’ and ‘temporal’ jurisdiction.
And, accordingly, Dr. Williams has been restored to his spiritual
functions by the decree of the Privy Council, in direct oppo
sition to the strongly-expressed sentiments of his own Bishop.
It is obvious that, on the principle put forth by Bishop Gray,
Bishop Hamilton might have condemned Dr. Williams 4 spi
ritually,’ in spite of the decision of the Privy Council,— he
might have announced to him in the very language (mutatis
mutandis') of the three South-African Bishops, in their 8th
Resolution, adopted at the 4 Synod,’Dec. 15, 1863, with reference
to myself (see Letter to the Laity, p.31)—
Should [Dr. Williams] presume to exercise [Priestly] functions in the
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
25
diocese of [Salisbury], after [this spiritual] sentence of the Bishop shall have
been notified to him, without an appeal to Canterbury, and without being
restored to his office by the [Bishop], he will be ipso facto excommunicate,
and it will be the duty of the [Bishop], after due admonition, to pronounce
the formal sentence of excommunication.
Of course, the Bishop of Salisbury, though feeling so
deeply on this question, has never attempted to carry out such a
measure. The notion of such a proceeding would not now be
tolerated for a moment in England. Besides, the Bishop of
Salisbury knows that by the First Canon of the Church of
England, he himself, as well as the Bishops of Capetown and
Graiiamstown, is bound—
To the uttermost of his wit, knowledge, and learning, without any colour
or dissimulation, to teach, manifest, open, and declare, four times every year
at the least, in his sermons and other collations and lectures, .... that the
king’s power, within his realms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and all
other his dominions and countries, is the highest power under God;—
and that by the Second Canon it is declared—
Whosoever shall hereafter . . . impeach any part of his regal supremacy
in the said [ecclesiastical] causes restored to this Crown, and by the laws of
this realm therein established, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not
be restored, but only by the Archbishop, after his repentance and public
revocation of those his wicked errors.
If, however, such a proceeding be acquiesced in silently,
while being thus introduced in a distant colony,—if it be once
admitted, in any part of the Queen’s dominions, that a distinc
tion may be drawn between a 4 spiritual ’ and a 4 temporal ’
judgment of an ecclesiastical Judge of the Church of England,
—I venture to predict that the experiment will be tried, at no
distant day, at home.
But Bishop Gray proceeds as follows, and I call special
attention to these ominous sentences, which seem very distinctly
to imply that he contemplates secession from the Church of
England, should the Privy Council pronounce in my case (what
he ventures to call beforehand) an 4 unrighteous decision,’ by
which he means a nullification of his own judgment, and a
�26
REMARKS OX THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
declaration of my right to retain—under the laws of the Church
of England—the office which I hold as Bishop of Natal.
If this diocese, therefore, were to be deprived of its temporalities by an
unrighteous decision, the Mother Church would provide means for the support
of another Bishop, and send him out to minister to the faithful in the land.
I would myself, were life and strength spared, undertake to return home,
and rouse it up to the discharge of this duty, and would, with my episcopal
*
brethren, consecrate another Bishop to minister to the flock, and to witness
for Christ, and His word, and His truth, in this land.
If the Bishop first resigns his See, and his connection with the
Church and State of England, it is perfectly open to him to
adopt the course proposed, and to establish this ‘Free Church.’
The Bishop, indeed, says, p.8—
I have claimed the same right, but no greater, to administer the laws of
this Church, whether in my capacity as Metropolitan or in that of Bishop,
than would be conceded to a Roman Catholic Bishop or a Wesleyan Super
intendent, in the administration of the laws of their respective communities.
This I deny. I think I have sufficiently shown that the Bishop
claims the right, not of administering the laws of the Church
of England, as they are laid down in her formularies, and inter
preted by the decisions of her highest Courts of Appeal, but of
declaring, by his own authority, the laws which he is to
administer, or, at all events, the interpretation which he will
put upon those laws, as Metropolitan of the Church of South
Africa.
Besides which, the heads of the Roman Catholic, Wesleyan,
Dutch Reformed, and other Churches, have never subscribed the
Canons and Articles of the Church of England, and conse
quently are not bound by her laws, as the Bishop of Capetown
is. If Bishop Gray really does what he has here threatened
to do, without relieving himself by resignation of those grave
responsibilities which he incurred, when he signed his adhe* Would the English Bishops, with the penalties of prcemunire before them,
venture to do this ? or would even Bishop Cotterill of Grahamstown, or Bishop
Welby of Saint Helena, holding Her Majesty’s Letters Patent ? Bishops Twells
and Tozer, or any other Missionary Bishops, not holding office from Her Majesty,
might possibly set at nought the Royal Supremacy.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
27
rence to the 1st, 2nd, 36th and 55th Canons, and declared
his unfeigned eassent’ to the 37th Article, and as the very
condition of his being admitted to the Episcopate of the Church
of England, ‘solemnly swore before God,’ to use his own
words, that he would exercise whatever jurisdiction might be
committed to him—
according to such authority as you have by God’s Word, and as to you shall
be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm,—
I apprehend that the act would be one of disobedience of
the Law, violation of the Oath of Consecration, and rebellion
against the Queen’s Supremacy. I doubt, however, if there
are many of the Laity, or even of the Clergy, of Natal, who
would be prepared to follow the Metropolitan in this secession.
I doubt also if all of those, who signed their names to the
documents already quoted, appreciated fully at the time the
nature of the act which they were committing, or saw clearly
the course to which the Bishop of Capetown wTas pledging
them. For these remarkable passages were not uttered in their
hearing as a part of the original Charge, but were added after
wards as a note, as the Bishop says, p.12—■
in the hope that it may relieve the anxieties of some, who have spoken to
me on the subject.
The Bishop of Capetown’s strong language.
The Bishop has asserted on p.13 that my condemnation—
has been deemed unavoidable by the Bishops of this Province, as well as by
the whole Episcopate of the Church.
I do not believe that he has any authority for this latter
statement. I presume it to be of the same kind as that other
assertion, into which his warmth of feeling has betrayed him,
viz. that all the clergy of Natal had declared that they would
never again receive me as Bishop. At all events, the language
of the Bishop of London and others in Convocation showed
sufficiently that they, at least, would not for a moment justify
�28
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
an act so unconstitutional and so unrighteous, as that which
Bishop Wilberforce regarded with so much complacency, viz.
the condemnation and deprivation of a Bishop of the Church
I
of England by the single voice of a Metropolitan, without
any right of appeal whatever,—not even to the Archbishop of
Canterbury,—a right which is enjoyed by the humblest Deacon
in the diocese of Capetown.
The Bishop then goes on to speak of the case on its
merits. And here he certainly does not spare hard words, which,
indeed, with thoughtful minds will not supply the absence of
arguments, and would not be used, I imagine, in support of a
really strong cause, but which produced, no doubt, to some
extent, the desired effect for the present moment upon the feel
ings of those who heard them. He speaks of ‘ the heresy of
these awful and profane words,’ p.19, of my ‘ reckless arrogance,
like that which marked the infidels of the last century,’ p.20,
of my using i the language of the boaster and the scorner,’ p.21,
of my ‘distempered imagination,’ p.21, of my ‘awful writings,
and of his duty to ‘ earnestly warn the flock against their im
piety,’ p.25, of my ‘ being led captive of the Evil One,’ p.33, of
my ‘ instilling the poison of unbelief,’ p.33, of my ‘ teaching the
very opposite to that which I undertook to teach,’ and ‘enjoying
the emoluments of my abused office and violated trust,’ p.31,
of my—
‘ teaching directly contrary to what She [the Church, i.e. as his hearers
would suppose, the Church of England] holds on fundamental points, and
directly opposite to what I undertook to teach when She gave me my com
mission, and for the teaching of which her faithful children have provided
for me a maintenance,’ p.32.
Finally, he asserts, p.36, that I ‘have forsaken the Living Word
of God,’ and, p.37, that—
all that would be respectable in the world, ignorant and careless though
some be,—all but the scoffer and unbeliever,—avowedly are on God’s side,—
and, therefore, he evidently means it to be inferred, are in
direct opposition to ‘ the Evil One ’ and me.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
29
These are, certainly, strong expressions. I cannot wonder
that the Clergy or Laity of Natal, who were present, after
hearing these terrible denunciations, enforced by the personal
energy of the Metropolitan and the (supposed) authority of his
office, signed at once the documents above quoted. Indeed, I
found it necessary, after reading this vehement Charge, to turn
for a while to the quiet reading of my own books, that I might
know myself again, and satisfy myself that I was not really
such a monster of iniquity as is here depicted. As some
of those, however, into whose hands this pamphlet may come,
may not have seen the two works of mine which have been so
stigmatised, and may not be able to procure them, I have
thought it well to quote a passage of some length from each of
them in the Appendix (1), from which the reader will be able
to judge in some measure how far such language as the above
was really justified. I shall also, for my own protection from
misrepresentation, publish, as soon as possible, an abridged
popular edition of my work on the Pentateuch, so far as it
has proceeded, which will enable many, I hope, to form a more
correct opinion of its nature than they could gather from
reviews, whether friendly or hostile. As before, however, I
challenge the Bishop of Capetown to present me by petition to
Her Majesty, praying that the charges against me may be
heard and investigated before a lawful Court, in such manner
as Her Majesty may direct. And thus it will be decided, not
by the arbitrary judgment of a single ecclesiastic, but by the
rightful authority of the Sovereign, as Supreme Head of Church
and State, acting through the recognised organs, whether I have
in any way ‘ abused ’ my office, or i violated ’ my trust.
But the Bishop also uses, as others have done, another
class of weapons, in place of argument: he tries to cover me
with ridicule and contempt.
My writings—which I have
‘ poured forth voluminously, borrowing for the purpose from all
sources of German infidelity,’ have been e met and exposed by
�30
REMARKS OX THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
not less than seventy writers ’; and he repeats the usual
formulge, p.25,26,—
The rapidly declining interest felt in his writings, now that the novelty
arising from the author’s position has worn away,—the wearisome length of
full replies,—an objection, started in a few lines, requiring many pages for
a 'thorough and efficient answer,—the little bearing that many of these
sceptical questionings have upon the real point at issue,—may all combine to
make theologians think that their time had better be devoted, as some are
devoting it, to solid works, such as the two great Commentaries on Scrip
ture, now in the course of publication, in which the chief doubts and
difficulties, which not a single writer only, but others, whether in England or
the Continent, have raised or felt, may be examined, and receive such solu
tion as our present knowledge and learning may enable us to give them.
I am glad to find that in these ‘two great Commentaries/
the ‘ chief doubts and difficulties,’ which continental, as well as
English, writers have ‘raised or felt,’ will be examined, and
‘receive such solution’ as the case admits of. But I venture to
predict that, if this is really done, the result will be somewhat
different from that which the Bishop of Capetown anticipates.
It is obvious that he himself is not personally acquainted with
the criticism of the Pentateuch, or he would not have ventured
to speak (p.19) of ‘the seeming difficulties and obscurities’ in
it, as—
arising, to a very great extent, from the brevity with which it relates events,
and possibly from errors in the text, which from multiplied transcriptions
may have crept in, but which are of no great moment.
If he had personally devoted some time to the close exam
ination of the matter, he would have found that the difficulties
are not seeming, but real,—that they do not arise chiefly from
any ‘ brevity ’ in the narrative, which is often, on the contrary,
very diffuse, but from conflicting statements, written by different
hands in different ages,—that any errors of the text, which
may arise from transcription, are, indeed, ‘ of no great moment,’
but they scarcely affect any one of the more important of these
‘ difficulties.’ At all events, he would have found, as others
have found already (App.ty, who have honestly commenced the
critical examination of the Pentateuch from the most orthodox
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
31
point of view, that the popular traditionary notion, to which he
clings, of its being wholly the work of Moses, cannot possibly
any longer be maintained.
But the Metropolitan has still other modes of describing
me. He says, p.27,—
With many other unbelievers, he is purely a fanatic.
mysticism, based upon assumption.
His system is a false
The passage, which contains the evidence of my 4 fanaticism,’
is the following, from a letter to himself produced at my
4 Trial’:—
Another takes a different view of Inspiration, as I do myself, and believes
that God’s Spirit is, indeed, speaking in the Bible to all, who will humbly
seek and listen to His teaching,—but that, even when we read the different
portions of it, we are to 4 try the spirits, whether they are of God,’ to 4 prove
all things, and hold fast that which is good,’ to 4 compare spiritual things
with spiritual,’—that it is a part of our glorious, yet solemn, responsibility
to do this,—that, having the Spirit ourselves, an 4 unction from the Holy
One, that we may know all things,’ having the promise that we shall be
4 guided into all truth,’ if we seek daily to have our minds enlightened
and our consciences quickened, by walking in the Light already vouchsafed
to us, we are not at liberty to shake off this responsibility of judging for
ourselves, whether this or that portion of the Bible has a message from God
to our souls or not; God will not relieve us from this responsibility; He
will not give us what, in one form or other, men are so prone to desire,—
an infallible, external guide—a voice from without, such as men often wish
to substitute for the voice within.
I have quoted the passage at length, that the reader may
see from the whole context, and not merely from the defective
*
* The Bishop has more than once misquoted my expressions. Thus he speaks of
me as having said that ‘ a man can try, and ought to try, the very words of our Lord
Himself, whether they teach truth or not,’ p.14, as ‘intimating that he may sit in
judgment upon the very words of Him, whom he still professes to regard as God
Incarnate,’ p.18,—whereas my words are these,—‘ By that light the words recorded
to have been littered by our Lord Himself must all be tried.’ In like manner, he has
quoted me, p.20, as saying, ‘ though a thousand texts of Scripture should be against
us,’—whereas I have written, ‘ should seem to be against us; ’ and I have further ex
plained myself thus, Comm, on Romans, p.209: ‘Either we have misinterpreted the
words of Scripture, or we have missed their connexion, or we have lost sight of the
real point and spirit of the passage, insisting on the mere letter of the word, and some
minor particulars, which were only thrown in to fill up the imagery, but were never
�32
EEMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
extracts quoted by the Bishop, what is my real meaning,—that
I am speaking here of Christian men, devout students of the
Bible, and am not claiming, as the Bishop says,—
for the heathen, quite as much as for the Christian, ... an unction from
the Holy One to guide him unto all truth.
But when the Bishop ridicules me as a ‘ fanatic,’ p.16,17, for
intended to bind our consciences.’ Again, on p.19 he quotes my words thus: “ ‘It is
not to be supposed,’ lie says, ‘ it cannot be maintained,’ that ‘ He possessed a know
ledge, surpassing that of the most pious and learned adults of His nation, upon the
subject of the authorship and age of the different portions of the Pentateuch,’ that
‘ He knew more than any educated Jew of His age.’ ” But my words are these, Part
I,p.xxxi: ‘ It is not supposed that, in His human nature, He was acquainted, more
than any educated Jew of the age, with the mysteries of all modern sciences ; Dor, with
St. Luke’s expressions before us, “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature,” can
it be seriously maintained that, as an infant or young child, He possessed a know
ledge, surpassing that of the most pious and learned adults of His nation, &c.’
So on p.23 he says of me, “In his Part IV,p.xiii, after having spoken con
temptuously of the Creeds, . . regarding them, evidently, as venerable documents,
which we may, if we please, altogether set aside, and quoting, in support of his
unbelief, the language of one, who, even in the worst days of the last century, was,
in his sense of duty towards his flock, and to the Chief Shepherd, far behind others,
&e.” I do not intend to endorse the character here given of Bishop Watson ;
but, at any rate, it would have been fair to have told his hearers that it was not I,
but His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, who brought him forward as a
bulwark of the faith, one who had long ago ‘refuted my arguments,’ and that I had
expressed no opinion whatever of my own respecting the Creeds, contemptuous or
otherwise, but had merely quoted Bishop Watson’s views.
But perhaps the most notable instance of this strange habit of misquotation occurs
on p.22 of the Charge, where the Bishop writes as follows
“Again, p.629, he says: ‘.They must try the spirit of the Prophet’s words by
that law, which they have within them, written upon their hearts.’ . . ‘If
the words which that Prophet speaks to them come home to their consciences as
right and true words, then, in God's name, let them acknowledge and welcome
them, and send them [on] with a blessing of ‘ God-speed ’ to others. If the voice
which speaks within declares that the utterance from without is false, then shall
thou not hearken; the word is not God’s, and he, who hears it, must not obey it.’
In other words, every living man has a higher inspiration in him than the Prophet;
or, as most plain men will think, the Prophet has none, i.e. he was not commissioned
by God, not moved by the Spirit to deliver what he did deliver.”
The reader will scarcely believe that the Bishop has here left out the first and
third clauses of a paragraph, of which he has quoted all the rest,—those two clauses
distinctly showing that I am here only paraphrasing the words of a passage of
Deuteronomy, xiii.l—3. See the whole passage quoted in App.l,p.67.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
33
believing that there is in every heart a witness for God, and for
saying that-—
the voice of this inner witness is closer to him than any that can reach him
from without, and ought to reign supreme in his whole being; for the
Light in which he thus sees light, the Voice which he hears, is the Light
of the Divine Word, is the Voice of his Lord:—
and when he asks—
What is this but to place man’s mind above God’s Holy Word,—human
reason above Divine Revelation ?—
I can only say that it appears to me to do just the very opposite ;
it teaches that man’s mind must be subject to the ‘Word of God/
to the Living Voice which speaks within him,—that ‘ Divine
Revelation ’ is the very light of ‘ human reason,’—that, in
truth,—
‘ There is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth him
understanding.’ Job.xxxii.8.
At all events, I should say that such a view, if wrong, scarcely
deserves to be derided as the ‘fanaticism of unbelief,’ p.15,—
that it is one, at least, which is shared with me by multitudes
of good men now, as it was held by many holy men of old, who
were not ashamed to be stigmatized as ‘ fanatics,’ because with
St. John, i.4,5, they believed in ‘ the Life, which was the Light
of Men,’ ‘ the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh
into the world.’
The Bishop of Capetown's own religious teaching.
It would be impossible, as it would be useless, to discuss
here at full length the different points on which the Bishop of
Capetown accuses me, as—
teaching directly contrary to what the Church [of England] holds on funda
mental points.
I have already touched upon these above, and in my ‘Letter
to the Laity’: and I can only repeat that I have taught nothing,
as I believe, which is forbidden by the laws of the Church of
England, and I challenge him to bring the doctrines of my
books before the only authority which has a right to try them.
D
�34
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
But the reader will gather the position which the Bishop him
self has assumed, in direct defiance to the recent decisions of
the Privy Council, from the following extracts from his
Charge —
(i) ‘Our Church, in common with the whole Catholic Church, of which
she claims to he a branch, holds that the Bible is the Word of God. Dr.
Colenso says that it is not.’ j>.31.
[I have said, Part II,p.387, 1 The Bible is not itself “ God’s Word ” ;
but assuredly “God’s Word” will be heard in the Bible by all who will
humbly and devoutly listen for it.’
I have said also, Part III,p.28, ‘ There is a sense in which I am quite
ready to speak of the Bible as the “ Word of God.” . . . But I prefer the
language of the First Homily : “ In it (Holy Scripture) is contained the Word
of God: ” and I agree fully with the language of Dean Milman : 11 The moral
and religious truth, and this alone, I apprehend, is the ‘Word of God,’
contained in the Sacred Writings.”’
But our Church,—the ‘Church of England,’ not the ‘Church of South
Africa,’—has declared, as the Bishop already knew, by the voice of her
highest Court of Appeal, that she does not require her clergy to say that the
Bible is the Word of God.]
(ii) ‘ The Church teaches that the wicked perish everlastingly,—that
this is our time of trial and probation,—that in the eternal world there is
no more trial,—that the judgment fixes our condition for ever. Dr. Colenso
rejects this view, in the teeth of the Word of God and the faith of the
whole Church of Christ! ’ p.32.
[Though the Church of England does not require its clergy to maintaiu
the endlessness of future torments, and I have given reasons why I should
refuse any longer to do so, yet, in point of fact, I have not maintained the
contrary. I have said that, ‘ I dare not any longer dogmatize at all on the
matter; I can only lay my hand upon my mouth, and leave it in the hands of
the righteous and merciful Judge.’ Nay, I have said further: ‘As many
leave this world, whether in Heathen or in Christian lands, it may seem to
us almost past belief that the vessel so defiled should ever be cleansed
again, and made fit for the Master’s use. And it may be so: we cannot
assert to the contrary, whatever hidden hope we may entertain.’—Comm,
on the Homans, p.216.]
There is one point, however-—the question, I mean, of ‘ as
cribing ignorance to Jesus as the Son of Man ’—which has never
been discussed before the Privy Council, and on which the
Bishop lays very great stress, speaking of ‘ the heresy of these
awful and profane words,’ p.19, and not thinking it beneath the
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
35
gravity of the occasion to use (as he does more than once in the
course 'of the Charge) a tone of mockery and scoffing. With
respect to this point I assert once more, that I have said nothing
which is not strictly consistent with the most orthodox faith—
that my view is the orthodox view, and that the dogma, which my
adversaries maintain, bears no little resemblance to that which
was considered ‘ heresy ’ in Eutyches, who is said to have main
tained —
That the Divine nature of Christ had absorbed the human, and that, con
sequently, in Him there was but one nature, viz. the Divine. Mosh. H.v.22.
In addition to the words of Bishop Thirlwall, already quoted
in my ‘Letter to the Laity,’ pp.35,36, I think it well to repro
duce in the Appendix (3) some extracts from the letter of the
Rev. W. Houghton, printed at length in the preface to my Part
III—since it may not be known to many of my readers.
The following are some further extracts from the Bishop’s
Charge, &c., from which the reader will be able to judge how
extreme are his views, on some of the great subjects which are
now under discussion at home.
Thus he maintains the infallible truth of every statement in
the Bible, as follows, Trial, p.390 —
The Church regards, and expects all its officers to regard, the Holy
Scriptures as teaching pure and simple truth: it is nothing to reply that
they teach what is true in all things necessary to salvation.
And again he says, Trial, p.388:—
‘The Ordinal does not ask of those, who are seeking to be admitted
to the lowest office in the ministry, whether they believe that the Scriptures
u contain everything necessary to salvation,” but whether they believe them
to be God;s Word—whether they believe them [‘ all the Canonical Scrip
tures ’] to be true. This is the first condition of admission to the ranks
of the ministry. The truth of the Scriptures [of every statement of the
Book of Chronicles, Esther, the Book of Job!] lies at the foundation of
Christianity. The first and most anxious enquiry, therefore, of those about
to be sent forth in the Church’s name, though without full authority to teach,
is whether they believe them—believe them to be true. Then, when the
Priestly office is sought, when the position of teacher is to be undertaken,
the Ordinal goes further (!), and requires not merely belief in the Scriptures
n2
�36
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
themselves, [as being- in every line and letter infallibly true], but a belief
that those Scriptures contain [N.B. the Ordination Sendee says 11contain
sufficiently”] all things necessary to salvation, and a promise to teach
nothing, as required of necessity to eternal salvation, but wliat [N.B. a you
shall be persuaded ”] may be concluded and proved by the Scripture.’
[I need hardly say, that these assertions are made directly in the teeth
of the late judgment of the Court of Arches, which stands at the present
time as Law in the Church of England, and by which it was ruled that
the pledge given in the Deacon’s Declaration at Ordination 1 must be regarded
as sufficiently fulfilled, if there be a bond fide belief that the Holy Scriptures
contain everything necessary to salvation, and that to that extent they have
the direct sanction of the Almighty.’ But their extravagance is at once
apparent, when we find the Bishop attempting to maintain that the Decla
ration made by the Priest at Ordination goes further than that of the Deacon,
the latter being understood in the sense in which it has just been interpreted
by himself,—i. e. he asserts that the avowal, that the Scriptures ‘ contain
sufficiently all things necessary to salvation,’ goes further than the assertion,
that every single statement in the Bible is divinely and infallibly true,—e. g.
that the colloquies in Job i.6-12, ii.1-6, between Jehovah and Satan, literally
took place in the courts of heaven, or that Jehovah ‘answered Job out of
the whirlwind,’ in the grand Hebrew poetry of Job xxxviii-xli.
Let it be noted that the same Declaration, which is made by the Priest,
is made also by the Bishop; so that it cannot be said that the Deacon’s
stringent declaration of belief is not repeated at the admission to the Priest
hood, because, having been once made, the second declaration is only super
imposed upon it; for, if this is the case, why is this second form of declara
tion required to be made again by the Bishop? Nor is there any ground for
saying that the Priest has to make an additional declaration as a ‘ teacher ’;
for ‘ it appertaineth to the office of the Deacon ’ also ‘ to preach, if he be
admitted thereto by the Bishop.’ . . It is plain that the declaration of
the Priest and Bishop really interprets that required to be made by the
Deacon,—in accordance, in fact, with Dr. Lushingtox’s decision.]
The following is taken from the Bishop’s ‘ Sermon, preached
at Maritzburg, on Sunday, May 8, 1864,’ p.10:—
The fact of the Resurrection is not questioned, nor yet the accu
racy of the records which the Gospels furnish of our Saviour’s life and
teaching. But, if they were, it would not avail. Other records besides these
abundantly testify to the historic Christ. AU the great facts concerning Him
are preserved in other writings, Were there no written and inspired record
of the Christ, uninspired history would, upon all fundamental points, supply
the deficiency (!).
The following are taken from the Charc/e:—
‘ We must commence by assuming something.
We need assume for our
�THE BISHOP OP CAPETOWN".
37
purpose no more than that the facts recorded in the New Testament are facts,
■—that the things were done, and the words were spoken, which are there
declared to have been done and spoken.’ p.34.
’
‘ What the Catholic Church, while yet one, during the first thousand
years of her history (!), under the Spirit’s guidance in her great Councils,
declared to he, or received as, the true faith,
is "the true Faith, and that
we receive as such. More than this we are not bound to acknowledge.
Less we may not.’ p.35.
[What was it that happened at the precise moment indicated, a.d. 1000,
to deprive the decisions of the 1Great Councils’ of the Church of that
character of infallibility, which is here ascribed to them up to that time ?
But the Church of England says in her 21st Article: ‘ General Councils
may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of
Princes. And, when they be gathered together, (forasmuch as they be an
assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of
God), they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto
God.']
‘It is the office of Reason to examine the grounds, to weigh the
■ evidence, of their being a Revelation from God. Prophecy and miracles are
the grounds upon which Revelation rests its claims! Through them an appeal
is made to the reason of man in support of the truth of God’s Word
[?. e. of every line and letter of Esther and Chronicles], and the Divine
Mission of our Lord. . . When the understanding is convinced that the
Bible is the record of God’s Revelation [“ ? that the letter of the Bible is
God’s Revelation”], the functions of Reason end. It has no right to sit in
judgment upon the contents of that Revelation, and reject what it dislikes,
or cannot comprehend.’ p.15.
[Alas for the multitudes of ‘ wayfaring men,’ if the only grounds upon
which the Bible claims our reverence, as ‘containing God’s Word,’ are the
external grounds of ‘prophecy’ and ‘miracles’! But there is One who has
told us that it is only ‘an evil and adulterous generation’ that ‘seeketh after
a sign’: and the Bible itself teaches us, Deut. xiii.1-3, that ‘ if there arise
a Prophet, and give us a sign or a wonder,’ and the ‘sign’ or the ‘wonder’
actually come to pass, whereby he has attempted to seduce us from our
duty, from that which we know to be the right, the good, and the true, from
the worship in heart and life of the One True and Living God,—we are not
to hearken to the words of that Prophet.
*
Yes, truly! ‘the Word of God
* Comp, the language of the Reviewer in the Guardian, Aug. 31, 1864, p.858:_
‘ Thus much seems to be clear, that a miracle per se neither has nor ought to have
that infallibly demonstrative effect, which Mr. Row attributes to it. Has he for
gotten that the Israelites in old times were forbidden (Deut.xiii.) to be lad away
into error by workers of miracles, and that we are no less expressly warned in the
N. T. against “ false Christs and false prophets, who shall shew great signs and
wonders, and deceive the very elect ” ? How then can a miracle, simply as such,
accredit an alleged revelation ? ’
�38
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.’ Thank God ! we have
no need to 'examine the grounds’ and 'weigh the evidence,’ in order to
believe that we have in the Bible a Divine Revelation,—in order to realise
most fully 'the truth of God’s AVord ’ and the 'Divine Mission of our Lord?
But, in fact, the Bishop, it will be seen, while professing to vindicate the
authority of the Bible, really rests it all upon the authority of the Church,
and puts the Creeds on a level with the Bible.]
To sum up, we believe the Scriptures to be the AVord of God, because the
Church, under the guidance of the Spirit of God, declared them to be such. . . .
On the very same grounds, we believe the Creed [he says afterwards 'the
Creeds ’] to be the true interpretation of the Word in all essential points. It
icas fi amed by the Church under the same guidance, vouchsafed in conse
quence of the same promises.
'One step further I will go. The Creeds, interpreted as the Church, which
drew them up under the Spirit’s guidance, intended them to be interpreted,
contain the whole Catholick Faith.’— Charge, p.34-35.
' Even were there no Scripture, the truth would not fail. We should
still have an independent witness to Christ in the teaching of the Apostles’
Creed. That Creed, though in strictest accordance with Scripture, is a
witness in addition to Scripture. Both owe their origin to the Church, under
the Inspiration of the Spirit of God.'' *—Sermon at Moritzburg, p.13.
[Is it Dr. Guay that I hear, or Dr. Williams ? the Bible' owes its origin
to the Church,’ says the one—it is ' the written voice of the Congregation,’
says the other.
The Bishop charges the Bishop of Natal with reckless haste
in publishing.
On p.27 of his Charge the Bishop of Capetown makes a
statement which I am bound to notice.
Upon the appearance of his first work, assailing the faith through his
Commentary [on the Romans], I wrote a letter, earnestly entreating him
* It is remarkable how exactly the Bishop of Capetown re-echoes the words of
the Bishop of Oxford, who says in his last Charge (1863), p.58:—‘AVe shall in the
long run be unable really to maintain the Divine authority of Holy Scripture, if
we give up the Divine authority, in its proper place [what does this mean ?], of
‘ the Holy Catholic Church ’; and again, p. 60, ‘ Once received on external evidence,
[«.e. on the authority of the Church], as the revealed will of God, soul after soul
will have, in passage after passage, the inward witness, that, through it, God Himself is speaking to its inward ear. . . . But the Book, as a Book, must come to
[the faithful soul] from the witness of the Church, before it is capable of receiving
from his own spiritual experience these inward confirmations.’
It is obvious to ask, how did the ‘AVbrd of God’ come home with piercing power
to the hearts of men in those centuries, when the canon of Scripture was still
�. THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
39
not to publish, and, when too late to hinder publication, sought to point
out to him wherein he had taught amiss. When unable to convince him,
I referred the book, and our correspondence, to the Fathers of the Church
at home, who met, at the call of the late Archbishop, now with God, to
consider it. Before I could receive their answer, the death of the beloved
Bishop Mackenzie compelled me to proceed to England. I then received
the concurrence of the Bishops, generally, in the course which I had pur
sued ; and, on the arrival of your late Bishop shortly after me in England,
I communicated their views to him. At the same time I entreated him to
meet three of the most eminent Bishops of our Church, who had expressed
their willingness to confer with him on his arrival, and discuss his difficulties
with him, hoping that he might thereby be induced to suppress his book so
full of error. He, however, declined. He would not meet more than one,
and then not as if he were in any error, but only as a common seeker after
truth. At that time he had not published his open assault upon the Word
of God; but, hearing that he had printed, for private circulation in the
Colony, a work reputed to be sceptical in its tendency, I besought him not
to put it forth in England, until he had met and discussed his views with
the Bishops. But this also was declined, and the work was published.
I must first correct one statement in the above, which
might lead to an erroneous impression. The Bishop says that
he had ‘ heard that I had printed ’ the rough draft of my work
on the Pentateuch £ for private Circulation in the colony.’ The
information, which the Bishop had received, was not correct:
and as I myself stated distinctly to him (see (i) in App.^p^')
the reason for which I printed it, viz. to put it the more easily
before learned and judicious friends in England, I regret that
he has repeated the above misstatement.
The charge, however, is here made formally against me,
that I wilfully rejected the kindly-offered counsel of my
Episcopal Brethren in England,—that I rushed hastily and
impetuously into publication, without caring for the advice of
those eminent scholars on the English Bench, who might
have rendered me assistance in my difficulties. This charge,
unsettled ? But from the above principles the Bishop, of course, deduces the
paramount necessity of believing in the Church, that is, as he says, of ‘ a hearty
belief alike in her Sacraments, her Creeds, her Orders, and her Bible,’—so that
belief in the Divine authority of ‘the Church’s’ Bible is here put on exactly the
same footing as belief in that of Episcopacy and Episcopal Ordination!
�40
REMARKS OX THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
I am aware, has been insinuated in other quarters, and probably
has done me some injury in the minds of fair-judging men.
But I have never seen it openly made before; and I am thank
ful for the opportunity, which it gives me, of setting the real
facts of the case before the eyes of my fellow-countrymen. As
the Bishop of Capetown has stated so circumstantially the
course which he adopted towards me, I feel it incumbent on me
also to state what occurred, and to support my statement with
the necessary documents:
The Bishop’s personal observations upon the Bishop of Natal.
There is yet one other portion of the Bishop’s Charge
which I am compelled in my own defence to notice. And here
I must, indeed, express my astonishment at the course, which
the Bishop has thought it right to pursue. Holding the very
strong opinions which he does on the subject of Church
authority and Scripture infallibility, and other questions raised
in the present day, I am not altogether surprised—however I
may regret—that he has denounced so vehemently the views
which I have expressed, that he has warned my flock solemnly
against adopting them, and laboured zealously to build them
up in the belief, which he himself holds to be essential to a
true living faith. And, confident as he appears to be in the
strength of bis ecclesiastical position, I can understand—though
I cannot justify—his hastening to anticipate any steps on my
part, for bringing the matter, though with unavoidable delays,
before the highest authority in the realm. He may be—and,
I believe, he is—acting now illegally, and with undue precipi
tation. He has hurried up to Natal, and taken advantage of
my absence to undermine my authority, and, in violation, as it
seems to me, of the constitution and order of the Church of
England, he has sought to withdraw my Clergy and my Flock
from their allegiance to their lawful Bishop. And even now he
is acting, as I apprehend, in defiance of the law, and in dis
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
41
regard of Her Majesty’s authority, by setting at nought the
decision of the Court of Arches, and asserting positively, in his
assumed office as Judge, that the Church of England does
hol'd, and requires its Clergy to hold, two doctrines, which the
late Judgment of the Privy Council has declared the Church of
England does not maintain; and he threatens to go still fur
ther, should the decision of the Privy Council be in my favour.
But the Metropolitan manifestly transgressed the bounds of
what could be proper and becoming on such an occasion, even
from the highest view that may be taken of his office, when he
proceeded to discuss my personal religious life before my Clergy
and Laity in my own Cathedral, and to hold up to them—many
of them my own children in the ministry, ordained by me to the
Diaconate and Priesthood,—a picture of ‘ the past career of
Bishop Colenso.’ As he has said of my criticisms that—
an objection started in a few lines requires many pages for a thorough and
efficient answer,—
so here, in making these personal remarks upon me, the Bishop'
must have been perfectly aware that I could not reply to his
charges, made in a few words, without entering at length into
details, which, though well known to himself, would be weari
some to my readers, and would involve the characters of others.
(I know,’ however, to use the words of the Bishop of Oxford,
on a recent occasion in the House of Lords,—however little he
has acted up to the spirit of these words, in the language which
he has used with reference to myself and others—
I know enough of the people of England to know that it is not by trying
to produce a momentary pain on those who cannot properly reply to them,
that great questions will be solved; but that it is by dealing with them
with calmness, with abstinence from the imputation of motives, and, above
- all, with the most scrupulous regard to stating upon every -point that which
shall prevent any man being led to a conclusion other than that which the
facts warrant.
The Bishop of Capetown speaks, for instance, of the Euro
pean population of the colony, as ‘ a soil in which the Church
�42
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
might have struck deep her root,’ if I had only done my work
more faithfully; he says—
the spiritual wants of the English population would have been supplied;
an influence would long ere this have been brought to bear on the tribes
within the colony, and the regions beyond; and, socially and politically,
the condition of this land would have been sounder and safer than it is, and,
religiously, nearer to God. p.30.
He does not mention that special reasons existed, independently
of the Bishop, why the Church has not ‘ struck her root ’ more
deeply in the white population,—that in Maritzburg the principal
clergyman, one of Bishop Gray’s own choice, holds views, de
scribed by the Bishop himself, as expressed in language ‘ going
beyond that of the Church,’ such views being utterly opposed to
the general feeling of the whole community,—or that in the other
chief town there existed an equally sufficient reason of another
kind, which I cannot here mention, but which will be well known
to every colonist, and especially well known to the Bishop of
Capetown himself, who warned me, when I took charge of the
See, that I should find this particular difficulty. He well
knows also that, of the Clergy now in the diocese, several are
invalids—who either sought the colony at first because of their
health giving way in England, or have broken down in their
work in Natal. And yet these are still drawing their stipends
as missionaries from the limited funds granted to my diocese
by the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel; and it would
be impossible at present, through want of means, to fill up
their place with others.
Then, as regards the heathen, the Bishop says, p.30:—
There is no saying what the effect of vigorous and extensive Church
Missions might have been upon the mass of untutored heathenism around
you, directed by one endowed with considerable gifts, who had prepared the
way for great success, by mastering, beyond all others, the difficulties of the
language, and making its future acquisition easier to all religious teachers.
But there came a falling away. The subtle poison of unbelief entered in:
the mind was turned away from the practical work which lay before it, and
given to the working out of sceptical theories. Confidence was shaken.
Works, begun well, were abandoned. Progress there was none. Instead
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
43
thereof there has been declension. The Clergy are reduced in number from
what they were. Men are unwilling to remain under such a state of things
as has existed among you. Others have shrunk from supplying their places.
Whatever there is of real work, whether in the mission-field or in parochial
work, was the result of first efforts, when faith was not undermined; and
for the last few years has been carried on by zealous men,—apart from,
almost in opposition to, him who might have been the soul of it, but from
whom there has been of necessity a continually increasing alienation.
The statements in the above passage—the only object of which
seems to be that of overwhelming the merits of my case with
prejudices—involve, I assert it deliberately, a most unjust and
cruel suppression of the truth. I will not stay to ask how the
Bishop was authorised to pronounce so definitely about the
direct consequences of my f falling away,’ as he calls it, in its
effect upon my practical work, of which he knows nothing, but
what he has heard from others, and those my adversaries. But
I may state that the chief contents of my Book on the Romans,
which he deems so e heretical,’ were present to my mind many
years before I went to Natal,—that I have gone over the
ground, again and again, with my own soul and with my
pupils, while yet I ministered as a Parish Priest in England,
—and that (as the memoir of Bishop Mackenzie mentions)
I expounded this very epistle—in substance, on almost all
main points, precisely as I afterwards commented upon it—in
daily lectures to the Missionary party who went out with me
at first to the colony. The spirit of that book has been all along
—and will be, I trust, to the end—the very life of my Mis
sionary labours.
But what have those labours been ? When I landed in
Natal, there were no books in Zulu for the instruction of
Missionaries, no dictionary, no grammar, (except an admirable
sketch in Danish, which a lady of my acquaintance most kindly
translated for me)—there were none for the education of the
natives, no translation of the Scriptures or Prayer Book, (except
a translation of St. Matthew by the American Missionaries,—an
excellent first attempt, but very defective,—and a few scraps of
�44
REMARKS OK THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
Genesis). The whole work had to be done from the beginning,
the language having to be learned from natives who could not
speak a word of English, and written down, and analysed, with
infinite, intense, labour,—and this in addition to the other
duties which devolved upon me, of preaching and ministering
to Europeans and natives, visiting from time to time on horseback
the different parts of my diocese, (one-third the size of England
and Wales,) and keeping up a laborious correspondence.
The Bishop of Capetown, I believe, has never set his hand
to this branch of the Missionary work: and he, therefore,
knows not what it is. When he had charge, at first, for several
years, of the Kafirs and Zulus in his vast original diocese, he
made no attempt, I imagine, to acquire the native tongue; nor
now, I believe, has he done anything personally to acquire the
language of such wild tribes as still exist within his own present
diocese. The coloured people, who abound in the more civilised
districts of his diocese, speak, more or less, the Dutch language :
and I do not suppose that he has ever preached in Dutch even
to them. But, if so, there were books enough in existence, from
which that language might have been learned. Very far, indeed,
am I for blaming him for this omission: he, too, has had intense,
infinite, labour; but it has been labour of another kind, in
building up the Church chiefly among a civilised European
population. And hence the injustice of his remarks upon
myself.
He speaks, indeed, of my being s endowed with consider
able gifts,’ of my having—
prepared the way for great success, by mastering, beyond all others, the
difficulties of the language, and making its future acquisition easier to all
religious teachers.
But he seems totally unable to estimate the amount of work
involved in this. I thank God for such c gifts ’ as I have, and
for the blessing of an University education, which has enabled
me to use them more effectively. But I have no special gift
for languages, but what is shared by most educated men of fair
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
45
ability. What I have done, I have done by hard work—by
sitting with my natives day after day, from early morn to sunset,
till they, as well as myself, were fairly exhausted,—conversing
with them as well as I could, and listening to them conversing,
—writing down what I could of their talk from their own lips,
and, when they were gone, still turning round again to my
desk, to copy out the results of the day.
In this way, and by degrees, I was able to force my way
into the secrets 'of their tongue, and to overcome those difficulties
which had to be encountered before any Missions could be set
forward to any considerable effect among the natives. Instances
of missionaries, indeed, may occur now and then—I am fortunate
in having some at this time among my clergy, of whom, however,
two are foreigners—by whom the native language may be
acquired, without the aid of books, from mere contact with the
natives, the Missionary himself having natural gifts, and de
voting his whole time to the study and practice of it. But with
the ordinary English teacher the case is different. He needs a
grammar, dictionary, translations—by means of which he may
correct the faults, which he makes in his first attempts at con
versation, and increase his acquaintance with the forms of speech
and vocabulary of the language. And the Missionaries will all
need books for the use of their native classes, and these, not only
portions of the Bible and Prayer Book, but books of instruction
in matters of common life,—containing the simple lessons,
which an English child should learn, in Geography, Astronomy,
History, Geology, &c.
Before, therefore, any considerable number of Mission stations
could be established, this work had to be done ; and such books
it has been my duty to prepare, for the use of the teachers, as
well as of the taught. And, after the character which the
Bishop of Capetown has given me, I must ask to be forgiven
for showing to what this labour has really amounted. I landed
with my family in Natal on May 20, 1855 : and it happened
�46
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
that on the same day of the year, May 20, 1862, after a sojourn
of exactly seven years, I re-embarked for England. Let it be
remembered that, during this interval, a considerable time had
to be spent in mastering sufficiently for myself the native tongue,
before I could venture to undertake the work of preparing books
for others. And then let the reader judge if the Metropolitan
was justified in his remarks upon me, when he had, or might
have had, before him the results of my labours, even in this one
department, during these seven years.
List of Books prepared by the Bishop of Natal for the use of
Missionary Students and Native Scholars.
(i) Grammar of the Zulu-Kafir Language, pp. 184.
(ii) First Steps in Zulu-Kafir, an abridgment of the former, pp. 82.
(iii) Zulu-English Dictionary, pp. 552.
(iv) Three Native Accounts of a Visit to the Zulu King, in Zulu, with
translation, vocabulary, and explanatory notes referring minutely to the
Grammar, designed expressly for the use of Missionaries studying the
language.
(v) First Reading Book or Primer (in Zulu). .
(vi) Second Reading Book—fables and stories (in Zulu), some of which
were communicated to me by one of the Missionaries.
(vii) Third Reading Book—sentences and narratives, from the lips of
natives (in Zulu).
(viii) Fourth Reading Book—elements of Geography and History (in
Zulu), 2nd Ed.
(ix) First Lessons in Science, Part I—elements of Geology, written in
easy English for Zulus learning English.
(x) First Lessons in Science, Part II—elements of Astronomy, do. do.
(xi) Common Prayer-Book, Morning and Evening Prayer, Collects, many
Psalms, and all the Occasional Services, and Metrical Psalms and Hymns
(in Zulu), 3rd Ed.
(xii) Book of Genesis (in Zulu), 2nd Ed.
(xiii) Book of Exodus (in Zulu).
(xiv) Books of Samuel (in Zulu).
(xv) Harmony of the four Gospels (in Zulu), 2nd Ed.
(xvi) New Testament, complete (in Zulu).
(xvii) Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, upon the proper treat
ment of cases of Polygamy, as found already existing in converts from
heathenism, 2nd Ed., pp. 94.
(xviii) Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, pp. 311.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
47
I might add also the first rough sketch of my work on the
Pentateuch, pp.72O; for I believe that by this work, and by my
Commentary on the Romans, I have done more to promote the
cause of sound learning and religious education, than by all
my other labours put together.<■
Of course, in preparing for each new edition of any book,
the whole work had to be carefully gone over again with my
natives. I make no mention here of first attempts, now thrown
aside as imperfect,—though they may have cost much labour to
produce,—but only name those books which are actually in use
in our Missions in Natal and Zululand, or, at least, will be in
use as soon as I return to the diocese: for I understand that in
my absence it has been ordered that none of my books sjiall be
circulated, for fear of their containing, I suppose, some porten
tous heresy.
In fact, among other attempts to defame my character, in
order to dispose more easily of my arguments, I have seen in
the Guardian statements to the effect that I have corrupted
the Scriptures in my translations. It is ridiculous to suppose
that I could attempt such a folly, which any Missionary of any
Church might detect. I am far indeed from supposing that my
versions are perfect; I may have missed the meaning of the
original in some places, and failed to express it satisfactorily in
Zulu in others. And I shall of course make it my duty, as new
editions are required, to revise and amend them continually,
giving all due heed to the suggestions of others now engaged in
the Mission work. But I challenge anyone to point out a single
passage, wherein I have dishonestly departed from the meaning
of the text of Scripture,—not certainly as it exists in the English
version, but in the Hebrew and Greek originals, as interpreted
by the most able commentators.
And this also I can say with confidence, that these books
are all written in correct idiomatic Zulu, and, as such, are
very acceptable to the natives themselves. My plan to secure
�48
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
this correctness was, never to trust to my own translations,
but to pass every word through the mouth of some one or
other intelligent native before I printed it. I would take,
for instance, the Greek Testament; and, first representing
in Zulu, as accurately as I could, the meaning of a clause of
the original, I would then require my native to repeat the
same in his own phraseology. In so doing, he would adhere,
of course, generally to mine; but, having been trained to
understand my purpose, he would introduce also those nicer
idioms, which at once mark the difference between the work of
an European and a native. Having mastered the Zulu tongue
sufficiently to be able to know whether he had clearly expressed
the meaning of the original or not, I would persevere in this
way until the desired object was gained; although, perhaps, in
the rendering of difficult passages, a considerable time might have
to be spent in expressing perfectly a single verse. All Mission
aries, of course, who have been personally engaged in the work
of translation, know something of this labour, and are able
to appreciate it: but the Bishop of Capetown seems to make
very light of it.
And who was the chief printer of many of these books ?
A Zulu lad, whom I took as a young savage from his kraal a
few years ago, with a number of others, who were given up to
us for education by their fathers for five years. The story of
their being brought to us is very interesting, but it cannot be
told at length here. Suffice it to say that we did keep them for
five years, as agreed, and that during this time—with the usual
drawbacks, difficulties, disappointments, failures,—which must
attend any school, but especially a school of savages, whose
white teachers at the best spoke only with stammering lips in the
native tongue,—we made fair progress with them in reading,
writing, and arithmetic, and the general elementary work of vil
lage schools. Some of them, besides, were taught the business
of the printer and binder, and others made some progress in
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
49
other manual arts, though not so much as we had hoped and
desired. The great difficulty was to procure the proper teachers
—steady energetic men, possessing manual skill of any kind, yet
willing to work in instructing these lads in a colony like ours,
where such skill and industry were much less easily obtained than
in Capetown, and secured readily among the colonists a far
greater remuneration than the Mission station could afford to
give them.
At the end of the five years, when the term for which they
had been sent to us had expired, their mothers, brothers, sisters,
worried their fathers to reclaim them: and, just as in any English
school, the lads, now grown many of them to the critical age,
themselves desired to be released from thraldom. At that
time, also, I had no efficient teachers skilled in manual arts,
under whom to place them if they had been willing to remain ;
and I was about myself to return to England—as I should have
had to do in any case, quite independently of my book on the
Pentateuch, for the purpose of raising supplies of money and
men for extending our Mission work. Of course, it was im
possible for me to conduct the whole work of this primary
Institution myself, or even to oversee it at all times, though it
was carried on beneath my own roof. I felt this more especially
when required to visit the different parts of my diocese, or when
called to leave it for some weeks together, to visit the Zulu king,
or to attend a conference of Bishops, 800 miles away, at Capetown.
Under all these circumstances, I had no alternative but, for
prudential reasons as well as in answer to the expectations
of the boys and their parents, to allow the children of the Insti
tution to return for the present to their homes, about a year
before I left Natal. They were most of them able to read and
write and cypher, and had made some progress in other ways ;
and I trust that they have carried to their kraals the first seeds
of a civilizing influence,—so far, at least, as to lead them to
desire to bring their own children hereafter for training, and
E
�50
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
leave them in our hands with more hearty readiness than their
parents did.
And this is the work of which the Bishop says, c works well
begun were abandoned ’—as if it were nothing that one of these
very boys, now a youth of eighteen, is at this very moment
conducting the whole work of our Printing Press, continuing
steadily at his labour, during my absence, without any super
vision in his office, correcting the sheets himself with the
greatest accuracy, and sending me regularly, month by month,
the fresh (proofs ’ from the press, which mark the progress of
his work, and not only labouring himself, but training others
also, without any white man to help him I
Doubtless, during the last twelve months or more of my
residence in Natal, my mind had been intensely occupied with
the questions which had been raised upon the Pentateuch in
the course of, and by consequence of, that very ‘ practical work ’
itself, in which I had been engaged. If I had never translated
with my natives the books of Genesis and Exodus,—if I had
been content merely to superintend the diocese, devoting myself
to the more easy and pleasant occupation of riding about from
place to place, visiting and preaching to the English community,
addressing the native congregations by the dull, lifeless, process
of speaking through the mouth of an interpreter, but letting the
native language alone,—I should, perhaps, never have had my
attention drawn so closely to the criticism of the Pentateuch.
But so far was I even then from ‘ abandoning ’ my native work,
that my very last act before leaving Natal was to revise carefully
once more the Prayer Book, the New Testament, and the book
of Genesis throughout, in order to give my boy steady employ
ment during my absence in England.
I think it best to quote in the Appendix (5) some letters
from this youth, received during my sojourn in England, which
will not only show the steady industry and energy with
which he carries on his appointed labour, but will also indicate
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
51
the course which the Metropolitan has thought it right to take
with respect to my native converts. It was not enough, it seems,
to brand me before my Clergy and Laity, generally, with all
kinds of hard names, but my poor simple natives must be told
that I have i gone astray exceedingly,’—that I 4 have rebelled,’
—-that I 4 do not believe in God.’ I translate also in the
Appendix some letters which I have received, while in England,
from native catechists, of whom also the Metropolitan says
nothing. They will serve to show in what spirit these, too, have
been trained, and to what temper they have attained, by God’s
blessing, under my instructions.
I repeat, it is unjust and reckless in the extreme in the Bishop
of Capetown, who went up to my residence, and saw this very
work going od, to make these statements—and others like them
—for the mere purpose of raising prejudices and causing pain.
As regards the particular assertion, that—
for the last few years this work has been carried on by zealous men, apart
from, almost in opposition to, him who might have been the soul of it, but
from whom there has been of necessity a continually increasing alienation,—
I do not think it necessary to descend into personal questions of
this kind: but I may say, (i) that such alienation, wherever
it may exist, may arise from other causes as well as ‘ sceptical
theories,’ and may be the fault of others as well as myself,—
(ii) that the Bishop’s statement is here, as I have shown it
to be elsewhere, very heated and exaggerated,—(iii) that with
respect to one, at least, of the most 4 zealous ’ and able Mis
sionaries in the colony, the Bishop, as appears from the facts
already stated, is prepared to drive him from the diocese,
notwithstanding the small number of the clergy which he
laments so much, because of his dutiful attachment to me as
his Bi,shop, whatever differences may exist in our religious views.
But the Bishop says—
The clergy are reduced in number from what they were. Men are
unwilling to remain under such a state of things as has existed among you.
Others have shrunk from supplying their places.
E2
�52
REMARKS ON TIIE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
Doubtless, those among the clergy, who do not agree with those
‘ extreme views of Church and State,’ which the correspondent of
the Guardian naively calls e home views,’ and who are prepared
with the Metropolitan to abandon the Church of England altoge
ther, rather than submit to her system and her laws, may be
4 unwilling to remain ’ under present circumstances. But the
statement that 4 the clergy are reduced in number from what
they were,’ coming from the Bishop of Capetown, is again most
unfair and unwarranted.
In the first place, the statement is not correct. The clergy
under my charge are at the present moment fifteen, including
two now in England, and two—both ordained by myself, and
drafted from my ozvn diocese, but—sent by myself to labour
beyond the bordei' in Zululand, and there placed, by an express
resolution of the Gospel-Propagation Society, under my charge as
Bishop. On reference to the lists of the Society from the year
1853, when I first took charge of the diocese, (though I only
began to reside in 1855), to 1863, the numbers of clergy
labouring under my direction will be found as follows, 4, 4, 4, 5,
7, 9, 13, 11, 12, 13,13;—to which are to be added in each year
two chaplains, military and colonial, who do not appear in the
Society’s lists, and also, from 1855 to 1860, my dear departed
friend and fellow-labourer, Bishop Mackenzie, whose noble
services as Archdeacon, given gratuitously to my diocese, I need
scarcely say, were not likely to be replaced. Thus the number of
the clergy has been increased from 6 in 1853 to 15 in 1863.
And I may add that, when I first landed in the diocese, there
was one single small church approaching to completion ; while
in the case of the two principal churches, (the Cathedral at
Maritzburg, and St. Paul’s at Durban,) the works indeed had
been begun, but they were stopped in each instance for want of
funds, the walls being only partially raised, and suffering injury
from exposure to the weather. At this time there are fourteen
churches, not reckoning chapels on Mission Stations.
Thus the statement above quoted is not even accurate in
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
53
point of fact.
*
But, when I consider the circumstances under
which it was made, I have still more reason to complain of it.
* The correspondent of the Guardian writes as follows: ‘His lordship [the Bishop
of Capetown] arrived by the mail-steamer on April 7th, to find the number of the
clergy dwindled down to eleven, some of whom also from ill-health are incapable
of work;—a sad sight to one who had just left nearly fifty clergy and thirty
catechists, actively and zealously employed in his own diocese, containing a
population inferior in number to ours.’
The audacity of this assertion is really amazing. In the first place, the number
of clergy has not ‘ dwindled ’ at all, as appears from the above data; secondly, the
fact, that some are in ill-health, is no fault of mine, but makes it more difficult to
supply their inefficiency with more active labourers, as the invalids still receive the
stipends of the Society; thirdly, as to the comparison with Bishop Gray’s diocese,
let it be noted that (i) the diocese of Capetown (52,702 sq. miles) is nearly four
times as large as mine (14,397 sq. miles); (ii) the white population of the former
(54,477) is also/owr times as large as mine (13,990), while a very large proportion
of the coloured people of the former (66,026) are comparatively civilised, living in
towns or villages, and able to speak Dutch or English, whereas the 156,061 natives
, of Natal are almost all mere savages, living in their kraals, and speaking only some
Kafir dialect; (iii) that the colonial government at the Cape allows for the clergy
of the Church of England in the Western Province AJ2,032 per annum, and I
presume that similar assistance is given in the matter of schools, while in Natal
only £350 is allowed (of which £250 goes to the chaplain at Durban, and £100 to
the Dean of Maritzburg), and the legislature has distinctly refused to grant more.
In short, such a comparison as the above may be hazarded in England; but it
would simply be deemed ridiculous in Capetown or Natal. The whole grant of
the Society in my diocese for heathen-work was £1,350 per annum, which
(allowing for contingencies) would not support more than six or seven married
missionaries, since their stipends must almost wholly be paid from home. And
how far would the £500 allowed for work among Europeans go, in a colony like
ours, where the white population are very much scattered, except in the two chief
towns, and where other denominations are very strong? For some years, the Dean of
Maritzburg absorbed £150 of this sum, and Archdeacon Fearne another £100; and
even in Maritzburg, the cathedral city, Dean Green, by the last Blue-Book, received
only £50 from his congregation, whereas the sum raised by the Cathedral Church
of Capetown in one year is returned by the last Blue Book as £1,288. For the
diocese of Capetown, the Society paid, in 1861, £3,782; in 1862, £4,101; in 1863,
£4,398, ‘general, appropriated, and special funds’; and only two or three, I
believe, of the clergy are engaged in work among the heathen-, so that the amount
granted viz., £6,430 from the Government and the Society, that is, thrice as much
as is granted to my diocese—is almost all effective in stimulating the exertions of
the white population. And, I need hardly say, it is comparatively easy to secure
those, who will be willing to minister among civilised people, white or coloured, in
villages or towns. Whereas, even when the means of livelihood are provided, it is
most difficult to find well-educated men, (i) willing to devote themselves to the
study of a barbarous language, (ii) able sufficiently to master it, (iii) ready to
bury themselves in the solitudes of savage heathenism, far removed from medical
advice, congenial society, and the other blessings of civilisation.
�54
EEMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
No one knows better than the Bishop of Capetown that the first
thing needed for securing clergy in a colony is money—and
then men—men of the right stamp, who will not be a hindrance
to the work, instead of a help in it. Bishop Gray, I believe,
has once—if not twice—been in England, collecting money and
obtaining men for his work, while I have been fastened to my
desk in Natal, engaged upon Zulu nouns and particles. It
would have been just to have remembered this.
And then, also, it would have been only fair to have borne
in mind that my diocese is, as regards the European population,
in very different circumstances from his own. The Cathedral
city, Maritzburg, contains about 3,000 white inhabitants, while
Capetown alone has more than 17,000, a population a fourth as
large again as the whole white population of Natal. The
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel had strictly limited
for some years past, before I left Natal, its grant for the
colonists to 500/. per annum, of which the Dean of Maritzburg
alone had been receiving 150/. (reduced of late to 100/.,
and, perhaps, now to 50/.), so leaving but a small sum to
be divided among the other clergy, in the more sparsely
inhabited, and therefore poorer, parishes. Efficient men are
not to be secured, except in rare instances upon the narrow
*
and uncertain incomes which colonial cures usually supply.
Yet, for work among the white-men of a colony, such
men are needed, as well as for work at home, not catechists
of limited attainments, or clergymen going out in search of
health, (though, for want of others, we should thankfully make
use of these)—but gentlemen of education, intelligence, and
energy, who will help to form the minds, and raise the tone of
feeling, as well as guide the religious belief, of the next generation.
And for work among the heathen, too, such men are needed—
men of large hearts, and abilities strengthened and refined by aca
demical training, with the power of mastering a native language,
*
* Of five catechists, sent out to me some years ago from England for native
work, with the view of their being, perhaps, ultimately ordained, one only shewed
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
55
and, when they have mastered it, of sitting down to talk out
religious questions with the native, entering within his heart,
as it were, penetrating into its secret chambers of thought, and
drawing out into the light of day the fears and hopes which
are common to man,—the religious ideas which lie undeveloped
in the consciousness of the veriest savage, ready to be quickened
into life by Christian teaching,—the eternal laws, which are
written by the finger of God on his heart as well as on ours.
This work, I need hardly say, is something very different from
the tame repetition, with babbling defective utterance, of the
cumbrous, and often unintelligible and absurd, circumlocutions,
which stand so commonly as representatives, in a barbarous
tongue, of the grand expressive language of our formularies.
But this work requires men of a different stamp from the
great majority, who are generally willing to give themselves to
it. Admission to the ministry in the Church of England invests
many a man on a Missionary Station with the social rank of a
gentleman, who in England would have been but a second-rate
schoolmaster in a National School, and who is utterly inca
pable of appreciating the grandeur, as well as the difficulties, of
the work which lies before him. To such a teacher let the
native bring his doubts, and he will be crushed with a severe
reproof, and warned of the guilt of unbelief. And so the old
evil will be repeated, and the futile attempt will be made to
propagate, as the essentials of religion, dogmas, from which the
native’s own quickened intelligence, as he makes increased ac
quaintance with facts in our schools, will of its own accord revolt,
and which he will hear also disavowed by many—not of loose
living and irreligious, but—of the most thoughtful and intelli
gent, white-men around him.
I believe that the Missions of the Church of England
require much improvement in this respect, and demand the
services of some of our best University men, and would
any capacity whatever for learning the Zulu language. It was impossible to turn
the others to account for our purposes, to my extreme disappointment, as at the
time they were very greatly needed.
�56
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
abundantly reward their labours. For myself, however, instead
of employing a number of inefficient and illiterate clergy for this
work, I would rather devote myself to raising up an intelligent
body of native teachers, who, if precluded from being ordained
as clergy—(for they might never be able to sign their adherence
to the Thirty-nine Articles and the Athanasian Creed, which
latter cannot at present even be expressed in their language)—
would yet, I trust, do good work as catechists and schoolmasters,
in spreading throughout their tribes the light of civilization and
Christianity.
So far, then, as ‘practical work ’ is concerned, I can assure my
readers that the Metropolitan’s fears are unfounded. My mind is
not‘ turned away ’ from it. I never felt a more hearty desire to
engage in such work than I do now. And I believe, as I have said,
that no part of all my life has been better spent for the advance
ment of this ‘practical work’ of religious teaching, and more
especially of Missionary teaching among the heathen, than that
which I have devoted to the composition of my books upon the
‘ Epistle to the Eomans ’ and the ‘Pentateuch.’ If, then, there
has been any seeming intermission in my personal labour—as, of
course, there has been during my two years’ stay in England—I
have but recoiled for a moment, to spring to it again with more
vigour than ever, and in the spirit of my books to carry forward
the work of God among my people.
My labours in the Zulu tongue are now, to a great ex
tent, completed—at least, those more pressing labours, which
have kept me, as I am painfully conscious, during the past
seven years, so closely engaged in work for the natives, as to
seem—but only to seem—to have felt less acutely the wants of
the European portion of the colony. The Bishop of Capetown
knows nothing, I imagine, of such distraction. But I shall
be free now to expend more of my time, as I fully hope to do,
in ministering to the wants of this part also of my flock, telling
them the glad tidings of their Father’s Love, revealed to us in the
Gospel of Christ, and teaching them that ‘having these promises,’
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
57
as 6 sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty,’ they should—
‘ cleanse themselves from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness
in the fear of God.’
Another view of the charge of dishonesty.
I have now concluded my review of the Bishop of Cape
and Charge. There is nothing in his subse
quent Visitation of the diocese which requires further notice
at present. But I think it right to say one thing more. The
Bishop has accused me repeatedly, in the plainest terms, of
dishonesty in the course which I am pursuing. He has spoken
of me, p.32, as one who is—
town’s proceedings
teaching directly contrary to what she [the Church of England] holds on
fundamental points, and directly opposite to what he undertook to teach,
when she gave him his commission, and for the teaching of which her
faithful children have provided for him a maintenance.
And he says further, Trial, p.399 :—
It appears to me to be of far higher obligation to maintain good faith in the
keeping of engagements voluntarily undertaken with most solemn vows,
than to remain in a post, the duties of which one can no longer fulfil, in the
hope of bringing about a change.
I, in my turn, will now set before the reader two pictures, and
will leave it for him to say which presents the portraiture of the
more honest and consistent clergyman of the Church of England.
The Bishop of Natal held, when in England, a College
living, the reward of his exertions in earlier days, and which
no Bishop could have taken from him for anything that he has
written. He resigned this preferment, and accepted from the
Crown the appointment to the See of Natal, knowing that he
would be a Bishop of the Church of England, and, as such,
would still be under the protection of her laws, whatever those
laws might be. For the sake, however, of what he believed
to be the truth, he was prepared to resign his See, if he had
found that the laws of the Church of England forbade the
publication of his views on the Pentateuch.
He now challenges his adversaries to point out a single
�58
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
passage in his works, which is condemned by the existing laws
of the Church, or else, if they are in doubt on any points,
to bring them at once to an issue before the only lawful
authority. He is ready also even now to resign his See,
whenever he shall be satisfied that he cannot hold it con
scientiously, or that it would be better for his fellow-men, and
for the Truth itself, that he should resign it,—which he does- not
feel to be the case at present.
The Bishop of Capetown has subscribed the 36th Canon, viz.—
The Queen’s Majesty, under God, is the only supreme governor of this
realm, and of all other Her Highness’s dominions and countries, as well in
all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal;
he has declared his ‘unfeigned assent’ to the 37th Article, viz.—
The Queen’s Majesty hath the chief power in this Realm of England, and
other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this
realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, doth appertain ;
he has ‘ solemnly sworn before God ’ to ‘ correct and punish ’—
according to such authority as to him should be committed by the Ordinance
of this Realm;
and he has received his appointment as Bishop and Metropolitan,
on the express conditions implied in the above acts. He was
bound, therefore, to exercise any jurisdiction which he might
claim as Metropolitan, in agreement with the above conditions.
But the Bishop of Capetown, while still holding Her Majesty’s
Letters Patent, deliberately sets aside the existing Law of the
Church of England, disregards the Queen’s authority, and re
pudiates the judgments of the Privy Council, past and pros
pective. And he positively asserts, in the teeth of the late
decision, that the Church of England holds all her officers
bound to teach two dogmas, which, it has been declared on
the highest authority, she does not hold them bound to teach,
viz. that ‘the whole Bible is the Unerring Word of the Living
God,’ Trial, p.382, and that ‘the punishment of the wicked in
hell is endless,’ Trial, p.370.
Let Englishmen, lovers of fair play, judge between us. I do
not accuse the Bishop of Capetown of downright dishonesty in
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
59
the course which he is pursuing, though it is obvious that the
very same language, which he has applied to me, may be retorted,
and with, at least, equal force applied to himself: e.g. p.31 —
What we have to consider is, whether one, who undertook an office of great
trust and dignity [at the hands of the Crown, as Bishop and Metropolitan of
the Church of England], and received the emoluments [and honours] thereof,
upon a distinct understanding that he ivould [acknowledge the Royal supre
macy in the Church of England, and act according to the laws and constitu
tion of that Church, which the Queen of this Protestant nation, who
appointed him], deemed to be of the very deepest importance [for the repression
of ecclesiastical domination, and the promotion of true religion among her
people], is to be allowed, now that he has changed his mind, and holds and
teaches [independence of state-control,—a principle] the very opposite to that
which he undertook to teach, and atfirst did teach—to retain his position in the
Church [of England], and to enjoy the emoluments of his abused office and vio
lated trust:
or again, p.32—
She [Her Majesty the Queen] has no wish unduly to interfere with [Dr.
Gray’s] liberty of thought or teaching; but she says, that, if he teaches directly
contrary to what she [in her constitutional office, as head of the Church of
England,] holds on fundamental points, [enforcing, as doctrines of the Church
of England, dogmas, as to the Bible and endless punishment, which she has
authoritatively forbidden to be enforced within the Church of England,]
and directly opposite to what he undertook to teach, [in respect of the Royal
Supremacy], when she gave him his [appointment], he shall not do so in [her]
name, or as a Bishop of the Church [of England]. He must do it outside
the Church [of England] :
or again, as above:—
It appears to me to be of far higher obligation to maintain good faith in the
keeping of engagements voluntarily undertaken with most solemn vows, than to
remain in a post, the duties of which one can no longer fulfil, in the hope of
bringing about a change
*
* In like manner, it would be easy for anyone so disposed to retort upon the
Bishop some of his other expressions. Thus he calls me a ‘ fanatic’: but no fanati
cism can exceed that with which, shutting his eyes to the realities around him, and
to the circumstances of the age in which he lives, he appears to surrender his
whole being to the worship of his own ideal of a Catholic Church, which, in defiance
of the known facts of history, he assumes to have continued one and ■undivided
‘ during the first thousand years of her history,’ and of which he seems to
consider himself, by virtue of his ‘Apostolic Succession,’ the infallible repre
sentative and exponent in all South Africa. So, when he exclaims in his
Sermon at Maritzburg, p.10, ‘ Conscience, Reason, Intellect—These be thy Gods,
�60
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
As I have said, I would not ascribe such dishonesty to the
Bishop of Capetown, though he has not hesitated to ascribe it to
me. I assume that, from his own point of view, his course of
conduct appears correct and justifiable, however others may
view it, who, perhaps, might say that, if he is not satisfied with
the laws and constitution of the United Church of England and
Ireland, and feels that he cannot conscientiously, in the exercise
of his Episcopal or (supposed) Metropolitan jurisdiction, allow
as the laws of the Church of England do allow—a clergyman
to say that e the Bible is not in itself God’s Word, though it
contains it,’ or that ‘ the punishment of the wicked may not be
endless,’ his only proper course is to resign his office as one of
that Church’s ‘ representatives in her high places’—that he
might still exercise jurisdiction as the Head of a dissenting
community, but not as a Bishop of the Church of England.
But the Bishop, with the exercise of charity and courtesy, might
have admitted the possibility that my course of conduct also,
from my own point of view, appears to me at least as correct as
his own—if not more correct—since that, which I and those who
think with me have done, we have done in the very spirit of the
Protestant Reformation, which proclaimed the principle of ‘ free
inquiry,’ and the right and duty of ‘ private judgment.’ We
have taken merely a step further in the very same direction. As
the Bishop of London said in his Charge (see my Part II,p.xxvi)—
As to free inquiry, what shall we do with it ? Shall we frown upon it,
denounce it, try to stifle it ? This will do no good, even if it he right. But
after all, we are Protestants. We have been accustomed to speak a good
deal of the right and duty of private judgment. It was lyy the exercise of
this right, and the discharge of this duty, that our fathers freed their and our
souls from Home's time-honoured falsehoods.
But the course followed by the Bishop of Capetown would
lead us back to Rome: it is directly opposed to the spirit of
the Reformation. Bishop Gray speaks, indeed, Charge, p.35,
0 Israel! ’ it is obvious to substitute ‘ Tradition, Authority, Sacerdotalism! ’ If
some are in danger of unduly exalting one set of powers, others are, at least, in
as much danger of making idols of the others.
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOW.
61
of 4 the modem Roman corruptions of, and additions to, the
faith,’ which, he says, the true Churchman 4 rejects and even
these he describes in very mild terms, as 4 grave errors and
mistakes on matters rather of opinion than of faith,' against
which the Church 4 protested,’in her Articles, 4 at the period
of the Reformation.’ This is certainly strange language from
a Protestant Bishop, the 19th Article of whose Church declares
that—
as the Churches of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred, so also the
Church of Home hath erred, not only in [heir living and manner of cere
monies, hut also in matters offaith.
In fact, the principle put forth by Bishop Gray is the very
same with that which was advanced in the celebrated Tract,
No. 90, the author of which subsequently acknowledged his
position in the Church of England to be untenable, by seceding
to the Church of Rome.
4 Modem corruptions of the Church of Rome ! ’ We know,
at all events, that the worship of the Virgin Mary, Saints, and
Images, was in full operation in the Church of Rome at the
beginning of the eighth century.
*
So much for the purity of
the Catholic Church 4 during the first thousand years of its history! ’ Nay, before the end of that same century, the portent
of the Papacy itself loomed already, as a dark cloud, on the
horizon,—and the minds of men were rapidly becoming familiar
with the idea of an 4 Universal Bishop,’ by whose irresponsible
decisions the whole Church was to be bound. And the fact is,
that, of these papal pretensions, the claims, put forth by the
Bishop of Capetown, are, though on a small scale, the counter
part; and, if we are driven to compare them, the latter are
as exorbitant as the former, and more preposterous, as resting
* See Milner s Church History, iii. p.159, where he quotes from a letter of Pope
Gregory III., as follows: ‘ We do not look upon them [images] as gods: but, if it
be the image of Jesus, we say, “ Lord, help us! ” if it be the image of His Mother
we say, “ Fray to your Son to save us ! ’’ if it be of a Martyr, we say, “ St. Stephen,
pray for us! ” ’
’
�62
REMARKS ON THE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE OF
on a less tangible basis, while they arrogate to the Metropolitan
more than even papal irresponsibility. He claims, for instance,
for himself, and for all Metropolitans and quasi-Metropolitans,
absolute freedom from all control. He might be guilty with
impunity of simony, felony, or treason; he might go over
openly to the Church of Rome; or, to use his own words, p.22,—
Were a [Metropolitan] to become an Atheist, or were he to believe in
Mahomet, or to teach all Roman] doctrine, it would by such a [principle]
be affirmed that there is no redress, no power of rem oval.
Happily, the constitution of the Church of England, by recog
nizing the Royal Supremacy, forbids such a claim as this to be
made within her pale.
Were there no other reason for my maintaining firmly my
ground against his proceedings, I should feel bound as a Bishop
of the English Church to do so, in order to vindicate the Church
of England from any complicity with those essentially Roman
principles, which are—perhaps unconsciously—maintained by
some, and by none more persistently than by the Bishop of Cape
town, but which I believe to be antagonistic to the first prin
ciples of our reformed Protestant Church, as by law established.
And so, when he continually repeats that—
‘the faithful children of the Church of England have provided for him, as
Bishop of Natal, a maintenance,’ p.32,—
and speaks of the congregations of Natal being—
1 driven from the churches which they have built, in faith that the teaching
of the Church, and of the Word of God, would be ever proclaimed within
their walls, and compelled to seek refuge in other religious bodies, where
discipline will at least secure to them the essentials of the faith,’ p.33,—•
when he says, Trial, p.399, that—
the founders of the See filled by the Bishop were still living, and provided
an endowment only ten years before, expressly for the purpose of teaching
and maintaining those truths, which they still hold, but which he has aban
doned,—
and talks [see above, p.12] of my being 4 sent back ’—
with the right to take possession of the property of the Church given for far
different purposes,—
�THE BISHOP OF CAPETOWN.
63
I reply that, if any, in England or in South Africa, have con
tributed to the foundation of the See of Natal, and to the
erection of the churches within the diocese, in the idea that that
See would be abused by me, while holding Her Majesty’s Letters
Patent, to cooperate with the Bishop of Capetown for the
establishment of a ‘ Church of South Africa,’ which should set
at nought the decisions of the Court of Arches and the Privy
Council, and disown the Royal Supremacy—or that those
churches would not be opened as widely, for the utterance of
free thought and the results of free inquiry, as is allowed to be
lawful in the Church of England,—they deserve to be disap
pointed : I never have been, and never will be, a party to such
a scheme,—to such ‘ wicked errors,’ [see 2nd Canon]—to such
(as it would seem to me) a treacherous abuse of my office.
But, as regards the churches in my diocese, I would remind
the Metropolitan that there are some, at least, of the laity who
have helped to build them, who do not agree with his views.
Further, I would observe that they are almost without exception
built on land granted as a free gift by the Crown itself, and that
these sites, as well as the far more valuable tracts of land,
which have been given by the Government for missionary
purposes, and which are now beginning to become productive,
were granted to me, as Bishop of the United Church of England
and Ireland, in trust for the uses of that Church, and not for
the ‘ Church of South Africa,’ which disregards the decisions of
the Supreme Court of Appeal (App.G) in the Church of England,
and disavows the Queen’s Supremacy. For such a Church as
this these grants were certainly never intended: this ‘property,’
at all events, c was given for far different purposes.’ And I
should hold it to be an act of dishonesty on my part, if I allowed
it to be diverted from the purpose for which it was originally be
stowed, so long as Her Majesty retains Her hold upon the district
of Natal as a British possession, and so long as I am entrusted
with authority to act in Her name as Bishop of Natal.
�APPENDIX
■—♦ —
1. Extracts from the Bishop of Natal’s Books: p.29.
(i) On the Fear of Death, from the Commentary on St.
Paul's Epistle to the Romans, p. 144-7.
Death in itself is no sign of a curse. Death was in the world, for the
countless races of animals and animalcules, ages before man’s .sin. There
was no sign of curse in their death. Nor would the death of man be
attended with any notion of a curse attached to it, but for the consciousness
of sin. The less we know or think of sin, the less we dread deatli; the
more we know and think of sin, the more we dread it, unless we have the
Light of God’s Love in the Gospel to cheer us. As human beings, bound
by ties of tender affection to one another, there is, of course, connected with
death, the grief of separation from those whom we love. There is also,
generally, the anticipation, and the actual sense, of pain and physical dis
tress. But the sense of grief and pain is not the sense of a curse. And
feelings of this kind are often overpowered by nobler feelings, quickened
within the hearts of men—even heathen men—by the grace of God, though
untaught, by more intimate acquaintance with the truth, as we Christians
know it, to understand more fully the baneful nature of sin, and to bless
God for its antidote revealed in the Gospel. How many thousands die on
every battle-field, or in the active discharge of life’s duties in every land,
without any dread of death, as necessarily coupled with a curse ! What
notion of a curse embittered the glorious hours of those who fell, fighting
for their homes and their fatherland, at Thermopylae or Marathon ?
So then, the idea of death is not necessarily connected in the minds of
men with that of a curse. But then comes the Law, and brings home to
our consciences the bitter sense of sin, of evil that has been committed,
against the light which we had, against our better knowledge and better
resolves, before the Face of a most Pure and Holy Being. And the
Devil—the Slanderer—the Accuser of God and the Brethren—makes use
of this to fill our hearts with guilty fears, which keep us away from our
Father's footstool. He teaches us thus to connect the idea of a curse with
�APPENDIX.
®
65
death. .-And many go trembling along the path of life, with the gloomy grave
at the end of it, afraid to look the ghastly terror in the face. And so they
turn their eyes ever, as it were, to the ground as they go, and busy them
selves closely with the petty things of this life, its business and pleasures,
that they may for the present forget their fears, instead of making light of
death, as they might, as they ought, and manfully pressing on to do the
work of their Lord.
For how utterly unchristian, how utterly contrary to the whole spirit
and letter of the Gospel, is this notion of death, as something to be dreaded,
not merely for the pain, or present sense of separation from the objects of our
love, which it brings with it, but for itself, for some idea of a curse attending
it, as the carrying out of a fearful doom, a judgment from God, which Adam’s
sin has brought on his race ! Separations take place continually in families,
lifelong separations, for various reasons, in the common path of duty,
with grief of heart, no doubt, and the dropping of natural tears of pure
affection, sometimes with bitter pain and anguish, but yet without sense of
awe or horror. Extreme pain is undergone under various circumstances, in
the hospital-ward, on the battle-field, far exceeding in intensity that which
we see to be generally connected with death. Often such pain is borne
courageously and cheerfully, sometimes with fear and shrinking; but there
is no sense of horror, no notion of a curse, mixed up with this fear. Now,
if we read the New Testament rightly, we shall learn to look at the sepa
ration which death brings with it, and the pain which may attend it, in
something of this temper. We shall learn to look upon death as a Chris
tian should do, as St. Paul did, who takes but little account of it, and rushes
very small provision in his letters for the comfort of bereaved friends, 'and
none at all for the dying Christian himself, except to tell him that he has
fought the good fight, and finished his course, and may now hope to enter
into rest. Indeed, we make far too much of death in these days. We
crown him King of Terrors, when our gracious God and Father has bereft
him of all his power to harm us, and deprived him of his sting, and made
him a messenger of grace to us.
Will it be said that after death still comes the judgment ? Why, yes,
and before death too. And this is the point, which we ought to bear in
mind, not to prepare for death, but to prepare for our Lord’s appearing, for
His coming to judge us, as He may do at any moment, as He actually does,
from day to day, from hour to hour’, in the ordinary work of common life,
as well as on special great occasions. The reason why we are so ' prone
to connect this judgment only with death is this, that we cannot conceive
of its actually taking place in this blessed world, where on every side we
find a Father’s Love. And yet it is really taking place from day to day
even here. A Father’s Hand is blessing continually, or chastening, His
children. But we feel as if we shall then stand before Him all alone,
stripped of the countless gifts of His Goodness, which here relieve our fears,
F
�66
APPENDIX.
and are meant to do so under the Gospel of His Grace, but which are too
often perverted into reasons for sinning yet more, and turned into lascivious
ness. In truth, however, the 1 judgment after death’ is but the carrying
on of that which is going on in life,—the manifestation of that which is
now taking place, it may be in silence and secrecy,—the revelation of that
Lord, who is even now, daily and hourly, taking account with His ser
vants. Those, who never bethink themselves now of their Master’s Presence,
will, indeed, then seem to see Him, perhaps, for the first time, who has been
with them, speaking in their consciences, observing and overruling their
doings, all along. And those, who have been consciously 1 keeping back
the truth in unrighteousness,’ all their lives long, and have died, hardened
in impenitence, may have reason to dread death, because it will bring them
face to face with Him, whose Voice they have heard in their hearts, whose
Light shone upon their minds, whose Love they felt on every side, and
yet they chose ‘the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds
were evil.’ But even to such as these death itself has no curse attached to
it. It is but the gate, through which their Lord and Master calls them to
Him, that He may pass the righteous sentence of His Love upon them—
that is, that He, who knows exactly what they are, in consequence of what
they have done, may appoint for them that lot, that degree of purifying
chastisement, which they need. And this, indeed, may be something fearful
and terrific, as the needful rod is to children.
But Christians should learn to make light of death, as St. Paul did.
Indeed, he tells us, ‘ we shall not all die.’ And, as we do not couple the
1 change,’ which St. Paul says, will pass on the bodies of some, by which
1 this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on
immortality,’ with any notion of a curse attached to it, so neither ought we
to connect any such notion with death, as it will come to others. To ‘ die,’
or to ‘ be changed,’ it is all one, it should be all one, to the Christian.
How courageously and cheerfully may we go to the duties of life, whatever
dangers they may entail upon us, with this thought to sustain us, instead of
shrinking and weakly wailing with fear at the idea of death ! To the frail
flesh, indeed, the form of death may often be terrible : but the thing itself
ought not to be, even to the spirit. There are some, who will say ‘ good
night ’ to one another, and retire to rest, perhaps at early eve, perhaps at
midnight, and who, on waking on the glorious mom, will put on their new
apparel. There are others who will not go to rest at all, but, having
watched all night, will rise up at once at the break of ‘ that day,’ and be
clothed upon, and mortality will be swallowed up at once in life.
(ii) On the Reading of the Scriptures, from the Pentateuch
Critically Examined, Part III, p.628-32.
"We must, then, even in reading the Scriptures, ‘ fry the spirits, whether
they are of God.’ In this way only can we do the Will of God, and discharge
�APPENDIX.
67
the true duty, and rise to the true dignity, of man as the child of God. We
might wish, perhaps,—many do wish,—to have it otherwise, to be able to
fall back upon the notion of an Infallible Book or an Infallible Church.
But God has not willed it so. He will not give us,—at least He has not given
us,—a Revelation of such a kind, as to relieve us from the solemn duty of
judging, each for himself, what is right and true in His Sight. His Spirit
has quickened us, that we may do, as living men, His work in the world:
He will not suffer us to abdicate the glorious office to which He calls us.
We must—not only claim and exercise the right, but—bear the responsibility,
of private judgment, upon the things of the life to come, as well as of this
world.
■ The Beuteronomist himself will teach us this lesson. He tells us, indeed,
that God in all ages will.raise up Prophets like unto ourselves, xviii.18, will
kindle His Fire within the heart, and put His words into the mouth, of
men, who, in all the weakness of humanity, shall speak to their fellow-men
all that they feel commanded to teach in His Name,—who shall utter His
Eternal Truth, and minister to their brethren the lessons of 1 doctrine,
reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness.’ And their brethren shall
c hear ’ them; they dare not neglect the Truth, of whatever kind, which
God’s own grace imparts and brings home to them from the lips of a fellow
man, however high or humble.
But they must not listen to him with a blind unreasoning acquiescence,
though He speak to them in the Name of Jehovah, and though the '■ sign or
wonder ’ come to pass, xiii.2, which he brought to them as the very creden
tials of his mission. They must ‘ try the spirit ’ of the Prophet’s words by
that law which they have within them, written upon their hearts. Jehovah,
their God, is proving them, to know whether they truly and entirely love
Him, and love His Truth, ( with all their heart and with all their soul.’ If
the words, which that Prophet speaks to them, come home to their con
sciences as right and true words, then in God’s Name let them acknowledge
and welcome them, and send them on with a blessing of ‘ God speed! ’ to
others. If the Voice, which speaks within, declares that the utterance from
without is false, then ‘shalt thou not hearken,’ xiii.3; the word is not God’s;
and he, who hears, must not obey it.
In this spirit we must read the book of Deuteronomy itself, and we shall
find the Living Bread which our souls may feed on,—we shall find in it the
Word of God. And that Word will not be at variance with the eternal and
essential substance of Christianity, with those words which ‘ shall not pass
away.’ Then we shall live no more in constant fear, that some rude stroke
of criticism may shake, perhaps, the ‘very foundations of our faith,’ or that
the announcement of some simple fact of science or natural history may
threaten to ‘take from us our nearest and dearest consolations.’ We shall
learn thus to have ‘faith in God,’ as our Lord has bidden us, Mark xi.22,
and not in the written records, through which He has been pleased, by
r 2
�68
APPENDIX.
inspiring the hearts of our brother men with life, to quicken and comfort our
own. When we hear such words as these—
‘ Man doth not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of
the mouth of God doth man live,’ D.viii.3—
‘ Thou shalt also consider in thine heart that, as a man chasteneth his son, so the
Living God, thy God, doth chasten thee,’ D.viii.5—
‘ If from thence ’—from the very depth of sin-wrought misery—‘ thou shalt seek
the Living God, thy God, thou shalt find Him, if thou seek Him with all thy heart
and with all thy soul,’ D.iv.29—
we shall joyfully welcome them as messages of truth, not merely because we
find them in the Bible, but because they are true—eternally true.
It is true that God loves us as dear children, and that we may go to Him
at all times, as to a wise and tender father, with a child-like trust and love,
as with a child-like reverence and fear. Rather, we must go to Him thus if
we would please Him, and act upon the words of our Lord, who has taught
us all to say, ‘ Our Father.’ We must ‘consider in our hearts ’ that He, who
has planted in our breasts, as parents, dear love to our children, a love
stronger than death, does by that very love of ours shadow forth to us His
own Eternal Love. Our love can take in every child of the family: our
hearts can find a place for all; yes, and our love embraces the far-off prodigal,
in his miserable wanderings, no less surely and no less tenderly, than the
dear obedient child, that sits by our side, rejoicing in the sweet delights of
home. He that has taught us to love our children in this way, how shall
He not also love His children, with a Love in which the separate loves of
earthly parents are blended, and find their full, infinite, expression,—the
Father’s loving wisdom and firmness, to guide and counsel, and, if need be,
to correct and chasten,—the Mother’s tender pity and compassion, that will
draw near with sweet consolations, in each hour of sorrow and suffering,
will sympathise with every grief and trial, will bow down to hear each
shame-stricken confession, will be ready to receive the first broken words of
penitence, and whisper the promise of forgiveness and peace.
Ah! truly, the little child may cling to its mother’s neck, and the
mother’s love will feel the gentle pressure, and will delight to feel it: but
it is not the feeble clinging of the little one that holds it up; it is the
strong arm of love that embraces it. And we, in our most earnest prayers
and aspirations, in our cleaving unto God, in our longing and striving after
Truth, as in these poor enquiries, are but as babes, ‘ stretching out weak
hands of faith ’ to lay hold of Him, Whom no man hath seen or can see, but
Who, unseen, is ever near us, whose tender Love embraces all His children,
those that are far off as well as those that are near, the heathen and the
Christian, the sinner and the Saint.
Happy, indeed, are we, who are blessed to know this—to know the high
calling and the glorious privileges of the children of God—not that we may
be more safe than others, who as yet know it not, but that we jnay be filled
�APPENDIX.
69
with hope and strength and courage in the assurance of this Truth,—that
we may he more living and earnest and joyful in our work,—more brave to
speak the Truth, to do the Right, to wage eternal war with all that is
false and base and evil, within us and without,—more patient in suffering,
—more firm and true in temptation and trial,—more sorrowful and ashamed
when we have fallen,—more quick to rise, and go on again, in the path of
duty, with tears and thanksgivings,—more eager to tell out the Love of
God to others, whether to those who as yet are groping, ‘ if haply they may
feel after Him and find Him,’ Who ‘ is not far from any one of them,’ ‘ in
Whom they live and move and have their being,’ or to those who have
known Him, but know no longer now the joy of His children, 1 sitting in
darkness and in the shadow of death, fast bound in misery and iron.’
But, in all this, it is not our knowledge, however clear, or our faith, how
ever firm and orthodox, or our charity, however bright or pure, that holds
us up daily, and binds us to the Bosom of our God. ? Our Father ’ will
delight in all the sacred confidences of His children,—their clingings of
faith and hope,—their longings of pure desire for a closer sense of His
Presence, — their holy aspirations and penitential confessions. But it is
not our prayer that will hold us up. It is His Love alone which does this.
‘ The Eternal God is our refuge,
And underneath are the Everlasting Arms.’ D.xxxiii.27.
2. Opinions of various Writers in the Church of Eng
land RESPECTING THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE PENTATEUCH : p.30.
It is interesting to observe that many, who have recently gone into the
questions of criticism connected with the Pentateuch—not merely those
treated of in Part I of my work, but such as are discussed in Part II, and
especially in Parts III and IV,—though starting from the traditionary
point of view, have arrived at conclusions more or less departing from it.
This alone must be sufficient to show to any thoughtful mind that that view,
at least—which ascribes the whole Pentateuch to Moses, except, perhaps, a
few sentences, interpolated here and there by another hand—is, at all events,
uncertain and disputable.
(i) Thus Bishop Browne, who has engaged to write upon the Pentateuch
in the Speaker’s Commentary, has said in his reply to the clergy of Cambridge,
in reference to my criticisms,—
‘The study of all the objections lately raised may, probably, oblige us
to take a wider view of some points than we had atfirst expected.’
(ii) The Rev. W. H. Hoare has said (see my Part III, p.xiii)—
‘ The general idea of dividing the documents in the manner that has been in
dicated [i.e. into Elohistic and Jehovistic portions], has, I believe, been sho-wn
to be based on more than merely critical conjecture. Aaron or Eleazar may
�70
APPENDIX.
fairly contest with Samuel the honours of the Elohist, and Moses, with “the
promising young men of Samuel’s time,” the honours of the Jehovist.’
(iii) The Rev. W. Houghton has said (see my Part IH,p.xl)—
‘I have diligently, conscientiously, and prayerfully studied the whole
question at issue for the last six months, and am compelled to admit. the
general truth of your arguments, though differing in some particulars. You
are aware that I published a pamphlet in reply to your Part I. I have
withdrawn that reply from circulation.’
(iv) The Rev. J. J. S. Perowne has said (see my Part LV,p.xxix)—
‘ So far, then, judging this work [the Pentateuch] simply by what we
find in it, there is abundant evidence to show that, though the main hulk
of it is Mosaic, certain detached portions of it are of later groivthd
(ff) The ‘Layman,’whose book is dedicated by permission to the Archbishop
of York, says (see my ‘Letter to the Laity,’ p.39-41)—
‘ It must be confessed that the results we have arrived at do differ very
'materially from the views commonly held. . . . These are facts very strongly at
variance with the notions generally entertained. Facts they are, however,__
not mere theoretic fancies or unfounded assumptions.
‘ Much of it [the Pentateuch] is certainly un-Mosaic, some earlier, some
contemporary, some later than Moses. Many portions of the Pentateuch
could not have proceeded from his pen, or even have been written under his
direction.’
It is true, the Archbishop of York has now stated, in his correspondence
with the Rev. James Brierley, published in the Times of July 26, that he
‘does not concur’ in the conclusions of the ‘Layman’ : nor do I. I believe
that they are only the first conclusions of an honest and truth-seeking
enquirer, which he will, perhaps, hereafter feel obliged to modify, as he
becomes better acquainted with the subject, and, in so doing, he may find
himself compelled to depart still further Rom the traditionary view, and
approximate more closely to my own on some points. But, however this may
be, these and other important statements are still allowed by his Grace to
circulate under the authority of his name; and though they had been specially
brought under his notice on May 18, by one of the clergy of his diocese, yet
two months afterwards, on July 15, he had not ‘found time’ even to look into
the book, of which (we must believe) a presentation copy lay upon his table.
The only inference, as it seems to me, that can fairly be drawn from this
fact is, that the Archbishop is aware that these statements, though he
does not wholly concur in them, are yet, more or less, and substantially,
true,—that his Grace knows that an honest examination into the question
will lead to results such as these, differing only in detail from my own,—
that, at all events, he did not consider these statements, which were so
severely judged when made by me, to be of so deadly a nature, when circulat-
�APPENDIX.
71
lag in a book 1 dedicated by permission ’ to himself. I may now, surely, predict
with some confidence, that at no very distant day the main results of these
criticisms on the Pentateuch, which have been scorned and stigmatised by
■many of my clerical brethren, both here and in South Africa, will be generally
acknowledged as truths in the Church of England, and form part of the
basis of all sound theological training.
Since the above was written, the ‘ Layman ’ himself has addressed a letter
to Mr. ~Rp.rRHT.-RV, which appears in the Guardian of August 8, as follows:—
1 July 26.
‘Rev. Sir,—My attention having been drawn to the letters which have
passed between yourself and the Archbishop of York, (touching a work of
mine on the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch), published in this day’s Times,
I desire to inform you that his Grace is in no sense responsible for any of the
views there set forth, still less for the way in which they are expressed.
For all this I alone am answerable. I have never regarded his Grace’s
acceptance of the dedication as in any way implying his sanction or approval
of its contents, but merely as an expression of his kindly feeling towards
myself. And I must confess that I am surprised that you should have put
any other construction upon it. I may add that the Archbishop expressly
declined to inspect any portion of this work before publication, doubtless
from the desire to leave both himself and me entirely unfettered.
‘ With regard to the matter of your observations, I would recommend a
more attentive study of the views I have set forth, in the form and connection
in which I have stated them, before you hastily conclude them to be identical
in tendency with those advanced by the Bishop of Natal. The main point
at issue in this controversy (as I apprehend it) is not whether every verse of
the Pentateuch was actually written by Moses himself—a point of very little
moment—but whether the Pentateuch is to be regarded as a true history,
composed in or about the times of which it treats, or as a collection of utterly
untrustworthy legends, wrought up into their present shape by writers many
centuries removed from the events narrated. On this fundamental point the
views advanced by the Bishop of Natal and myself are as diametrically
opposite as can well be conceived. Of this it will be easy for you to con
vince yourself, if, instead of trusting to a few extracts culled by the Bishop
to suit a particular purpose, you should think it worth while attentively to
peruse the books themselves. I remain, Rev. Sir, yours respectfully,
‘ A Layman or the Church or England.
‘Author of The Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch Considered?
With reference to the above, Mr. Brierley has favoured me with the
following communication:—
1 Mossley Hall, Congleton, Aug. 25, 1864.
‘Mv Lord,—In the Guardian of Aug. 3, there appeared a letter addressed
to myself from the “ Layman,” author of “ The Pentateuch Considered.”
‘ On Aug. 8 I sent the enclosed 11 Reply ” to that letter to the Editor of
�72
APPENDIX.
the Guardian. As this has not been published in that j oumal, either on the
10th or 17th or 24th, I can only conclude that it has been designedly, and,
I must say, most unfairly, suppressed.
‘1 now beg leave to forward it to you, requesting you to make any use
of it you may think proper. I have the honour to be, my Lord, your
humble and obedient servant,
‘ James Brierley.’
(Mossley Hall, Congleton, August 8, 1864.
* Sir,—In reply to your letter addressed to me, and published in last week’s
Guardian, I beg leave to make the following observations:—
* (1) The question is not in what light you may have regarded the Arch
bishop’s acceptance of your dedication, but in what light the Church atlarge, and readers generally, will regard it.
‘(2) I put no “ construction” upon his Grace’s acceptance of it, until I
had drawn his attention to the extracts in question, had asked whether he
approved of them, and had waited six weeks in vain for a reply, when I
very naturally assumed that his Grace did approve of them.
( (8) It now appears that it was not through some accident, or from
want of time, that the Archbishop did not look at your book, before he
allowed it to circulate under the authority of his name; but that he de
liberately a declined" to look at it beforehand, “doubtless,” as you say,
“from the desire to leave both himself as well as you unfettered.”
‘ This course of proceeding will seem strange, I think, to many of the Clergy
and Laity, with reference to such a book as this, at such a crisis in the
history of the Church.
1 (4) I said nothing of the u tendency ” of your views. I stated only that,
assuming your statements to be in any degree well-founded, they are u ex
traordinary ”; that “they make it impossible to deny the Tight of the
a Bishop of Natal to maintain his theory of the composition of the PentaII teuch, which only differs in point of detail from yours ”; that we “ must
il now make up our minds to admit the composite character of the Penta11 teuch, and the non-Mosaic origin of considerable portions of it.”
1 (5) The question at issue is not certainly whether every verse of the
Pentateuch was actually written by Moses himself, but whether large
portions of it—(you say, more than one-fifth at least)—were written “ after
the conquest of Canaan,” while, you add, “ a variety of explanatory notes,
“ additions, and occasional alterations, with a few passages of greater
“ length, chiefly from other ancient narratives, were introduced by a writer
“of much later date, very probably, in the days of Saul,”—that is, I suppose,
by a writer some centuries removed from the events narrated.
‘ (6) Though I and others may admit that this point, of the Mosaic
authorship of the whole Pentateuch, is “ a point of very little moment,” yet
you must be aware that this is a point considered to be of vital consequence
�APPENDIX.
73
by numbers of the orthodox Clergy and Laity, as by the Rev. Sir PI.
Thompson, who says of your own statements, in the Churchman of July 14,
that their 11 intended drift is to unsettle our belief that the Pentateuch is the
u work of Moses," and that they are “ scattering broadcast throughout the
“ land the seeds of doubt and infidelity.”
1 (7) As towhat the Bishop of Natal’s motives in “culling” extracts
from your book may have been, of course I know nothing; but it appears to
me that he has done so for no other purpose than to show, as he says himself,
in his letter to the Laity, p.38, that an honest enquirer (meaning yourself)
has been obliged to admit “that the results which he has arrived at do
“ differ very materially from the views commonly held," that “these wq facts,
“ very strongly at variance with the notions generally entertained," that “facts
“ they are, however, not mere theoretic fancies, or unfounded assumptions."
‘ At all events, the Bishop does not claim you as agreeing in his “ views.”
He says in his letter, p.41, that “ the author believes, apparently, in the
“ literal historical truth of the accounts of the Creation, Paradise, the Fall,
“ the Deluge, the Rainbow, and the Confusion of Tongues,” which the
Bishop, in his books, tells us plainly he does not believe in.
i (8) In conclusion, if I could only find time, I would gladly read your
work : but-you must pardon me for saying that it can scarcely be necessary
for me to do so; since, however, your views upon the whole subject may
differ from the Bishop of Natal’s, the admissions made by yourself (as proved
by the extracts quoted) sufficiently agree with his statements, as to satisfy
me that th the main the question as to the unity and authenticity of the
Pentateuch is pretty much as the Bishop has stated it to be,—in accordance,
I believe, with most of the great continental critics.
11 remain, Sir, yours truly,
1 James Brierley,
1 Incumbent of Holy Trinity, Mossley, near Congleton.
1 To “A Layman,” &c.’
(vi) The Bishop of Oxeord, also, appears to have made admissions of some
importance at the recent Conference of his clergy at Oxford, though it is
somewhat difficult to gather the Bishop’s exact meaning from the reports
which have been given of his words by different hearers, and from his own
statement as copied below.
(1) One report (Standard, August 10) says as follows:—
1 The Bishop of Oxford, in an elaborate address, enlarged with much
force upon the anti-Biblical opinions enunciated by distinguished members
of the University during the past few years, and by careful argument urged
that the true explanation of the unhappy differences existing was to be
found in a misconception of the manner in which inspired truths were trans
mitted to us. He contended that the apparent anomalies in Holy Writ were
�74
APPENDIX.
in consequence of indirect revelations,—the persons, to whom many of the
revelations were made, having varied their rendering of them to such an extent
as to give grounds for objections on the part of those, who are disposed to
look at the Scriptures with a severely critical eye. In proof of this position,
his lordship pointed out that the Ten Commandments, which were inscribed
by the finger of God on Mount Sinai, and the miracles He worked, and the
parables He gave,—the whole of which acts were performed directly by God
Himself,—had never been the subject of adverse criticism from the pen of
the greatest infidel, from the proclamation of the Gospel to the present
time. That anomalies did exist, no one was prepared to doubt. But the
clear and only explanation was given in the fact, that the messages from
Heaven were not verbally transmitted. And his lordship strongly urged that
this construction was one that should be used by all members of the Chris
tian Church, in refuting the attacks to which it was subject at the hands of
those who were prepared to doubt, or to induce others to doubt, the inspi
ration and authenticity of the Divine Word.’
(2) The account in the Guardian of August 17, taken from the Oxford
Herald, and having all the appearance of being a tolerably accurate report
of the Bishop’s words, contains the following statements as corm’ng from his
mouth in the course of his address:—
‘Reverend Brethren,—It has been set down in the scheme of this after
noon that I should address a few words to you first upon a discussion of the
Word of God, of which you are afterwards to hear from Archdeacon Lee
and Dr. Wordsworth. But I am at a loss to know what to do in saying a
few general words to the purpose; because, in doing so, I might be in dan
ger of intrenching upon the deliberations of those, who have prepared papers
for this Congress; and I almost thought it would be better to offer no
remarks till the conclusion of your proceedings. But I have been told that
you think I am under an engagement to offer some preliminary observations;
and I therefore do not hesitate to respond to the wishes so expressed. Of
course, the great matter before us is the consideration—not of that doctrinal
question so admirably set before us in the sermon this morning, for which
we cannot be too grateful,—it is not so much to discuss that, as it is to
considei' the question of the Inspiration of the Word of God, which some of
the present members of the Church have raised into great prominence, so
that we may be prepared with answers to objections so raised.
‘ It is of great importance at the present time that these matters should
have been well thought over by the clergy in considering the great and
difficult subject of what is understood by the Inspiration of the Word of
God. In limine it is of great importance to notice this question: for the fact,
that all Scripture is written by Inspiration for our instruction, means that
Scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost; and, because that is true, we dispose
of the most formidable objections, which stand in the way of any dispute.
�APPENDIX.
75
I All truth is from God alone. Truth on any subject-matter being from
God, shows that it must be inspired so far as it is true. . . . But now what
is Inspiration ? Because we all know that TIoly Scripture has given us no
definition of what it is, or what the Church has held it to be, and we are
therefore led to decide what it is according to the ordinary latitude of in
terpretation. And, first, in approaching that point, and in giving our inter
pretation of what Inspiration does mean, we can have recourse to no antecedent
probabilities as our sure guide—nothing which would show what would be the
precise message of God's thought to man, so that the only way is to take the
Rook as a fact, examining it as to the way in which God has been pleased to
give us His inspired word.
*
And, if we do that, we are met by this view.
Taking it as a message from God to man, knowing that it embodies thought,
which man without the message could not have conceived, and knowing
that he could not from antecedent probabilities have discovered the inten
tions of God, we must examine it as we should any other message, and see how
He, who has sent it, has been pleased to send it to us......
‘ As under the first message that was inscribed in stone, or that was spoken
by the Prophet in a state of rhapsody, there would be the simple communi
cation from God to the receiver; but in the other cases, in which the mes
senger was to deliver the message, there was room for admitting the presence
of the human essence, in a way that, while it had the authority of God,
leaves room for the surrounding human element, in which there might be direct
error, without touching the slightest truth of Inspiration.’
(3) 'An Oxfordshire Rector’ reports to the Record (August 10) as
follows:—
II was present yesterday and to-day at a conference of the clergy under
the presidency of the Bishop of the Diocese. The subjects for discussion
were “ The Word of God and Inspiration.” All the speakers recognised the
fact, that these for the Christian are the great subjects of the day. The
Bishop opened the conference with some general remarks, and inter alia
propounded his theory of Inspiration. It was, I think, as follows,—“ That
the writers of the Old and New Testament might be either conscious or
unconscious of the meaning, scope, and object of the message which they
* I need hardly say that it is very satisfactory to find the Bishop of Oxford
here using language, which is almost identical with that, by which on p.xix of
my Part IV I have sought to justify my Critical Examination of the Pentateuch.
I have said: ‘ We are utterly unable to judge a priori what parts of Scripture must
be recorded with strict verbal accuracy. We can only do—what in these criticisms
we are endeavouring to do,—that is, work out,—with all care, with all the ability
which God has given us, and with all the help of our best critical apparatus,—a
posteriori, from the documents actually in our hands,—the real substantial facts
which the Bible contains, and take them as God’s facts for our guidance.’
�76
APPENDIX.
delivered; that, if the first, as would, of course, he true in the case of Jesus,
they could make no possible mistake, all which they said would be abso
lutely true, it would be without reservation the mind of the Spirit of God;
that, if the latter, they might err, from the want of the power of comprehension
incident to humanityThe Bishop explained, with his accustomed power
and facility of diction, the opinion which he had formed upon the subject,
and illustrated his meaning at length by adducing the simile of the servant
sent by his master to convey a message to a friend, of the nature of which
the two corresponding parties wished the servant to be ignorant: and, in the
course of his remarks, the Bishop used the terms, “ the human element in the
Bible.”
‘ There was, of course, considerable discussion subsequently upon the re
marks made by his lordship, and to-day the subject was again referred to.
Many of the clergy present felt startled to find that one of those, who were
foremost to denounce Colenso and the Essayists, appeared to endorse the
truth of the principle which they advocate. The Bishop attempted to
explain his meaning to-day : he re-announced his opinion with this saving
proviso, that as yet he had not found, and he believed he never should find,
a particle of error in the Word of God. But what of the principle which
he enunciated ? Many assert that they have discovered historical, geographi
cal, arithmetical, scientific, moral, and religious error in the Bible. How
does his lordship propose to answer them ? ’
(4) Among the clergy, who ‘ felt startled ’ at the above remarkable admis
sions, appears to have been the Rev. W. R. Fremantle, one of the leaders in
procuring the signature of the 11,000 clergy to the Oxford Declaration. He
writes to the Record (August 17) as follows:—
‘ What I understood the Bishop to say [on the second day] was that the
whole Scripture had been written under the superintendence of the Holy Ghost,
so that all and every part of it was absolutely free from error,—that no error
had as yet been found in it, and he believed no error ever would be found
in it. He believed the Bible not because it contained the truth, but because
it was given to us by inspiration of God. Then, in speaking of the two
forms of inspiration referred to by the u Oxfordshire Rector,” the Bishop
said that, as regards the human element, he thought there were some points
in which a man’s natural reason and memory would suffice without a su
pernatural revelation, as, for example, St. Paul referring to his cloak being
left at Troas (!) In this department of the subject, he could conceive the
possibility in the surroundings of the man of the existence of inconsistency,
contradiction, and error, if the writers had been left entirely to themselves.
But, inasmuch as a revelation to the man was one thing, and inspiration to
record truth was another, so the human element had been guided and kept
from error by the general superintendence of the Holy Ghost.
( This explanation I accepted with much thankfulness; for, after the state
�APPENDIX.
77
ment made by his lordship on the first day, I, in common with others of the
clergy present, was in some doubt as to what he really meant.’
(5) So, too, the Rev. F. M. Cunningham writes to the Record (August
19) and states, inter alia, as follows :—
‘ On the second day, Mr. Fremantle called his Lordship’s attention to the
fact that the minds of his clergy were disturbed, and requested him to give
an explanation of his meaning. He did so, and in such terms as led Mr.
Fremantle to say that his mind was inexpressibly relieved. In this view
of the case I am convinced that most of those who were present fully con
curred.’ But Mr. Cunningham also admits that 1 in his Lordship’s address
on the first day, there was undoubtedly room for anxiety, and the minds of
many were disturbed. I largely shared in their anxiety, though I felt
assured that I had misunderstood the Bishop, when I heard him, at the
end of the first day’s proceedings, endorse with entire cordiality all that had
fallen from Archdeacon Lee of Dublin.’
(6) Once more, ‘ An Oxford Rector ’ (the Rev. A. M. W. Christopher)
writes also to the Record, of the same date, stating that he had enclosed
to the Bishop the Standard}s report of what he had said, and also that of
the ‘Oxfordshire Rector,’ asking his Lordship,'/if he thought fit to do so,
kindly to write briefly his opinion on the subject on which he spoke, that
this might be "given accurately in his own words ’: and he also added,
‘ Your Lordship will not, I am sure, think me wanting in respect, if I say
that I was not satisfied by what your Lordship said, as I understood it, on
the first day of the Conference.’
(7) The Bishop replied as follows :—
‘ ‘ Many thanks for your very kind letter. I had not seen either of the
newspaper extracts you send me. But if I had, I should not have answered
them. It is a hopeless endeavour to set oneself right by answering anything:
and, if you reply to one, you must reply to all. I therefore leave matters to
right themselves. It is quite a different matter replying to you; and I do
it with the greatest pleasure. I said nothing of the sort attributed to me in
these extracts. Perhaps the subject was too abstruse to be treated so briefly;
and this has led to misapprehension. In brief, my belief is this: The
whole Bible comes to us as “ The Word of God,” under the sanction of God
the Holy Ghost. We cannot pick and choose amidst its contents. All is
God’s Word to us. But, as I believe that this, which I hold as the only
orthodox view, is encompassed with many difficulties by what is called
the theory of “Verbal Inspiration,” I desired to show how, in my judgment,
a careful scrutiny of the Bible, which revealed the “divers manners” in
which the Holy Ghost spake,—
1 (1) Sometimes by the mere mechanical use of the human agent who
�78
APPENDIX.
conveyed the message, as when (i) God wrote words on the first tables,
(ii) dictated them for the second, or (iii) committed them to prophets simply
to repeat, or (iv) spake them through the prophets,—
‘(2) Sometimes by possessing the human instrument with a complete
knowledge of that he was to speak, and leaving him to express it, under the
mere suggestions and guardianship of His own special presence, according to
the natural use of the human faculties,—
‘I desired, I say, to show how this would greatly lessen these difficulties,
and enable men to realize the essential difference between Holy Scripture
and any other books,—namely, that as all truth comes from God, other books
may be in a sense said to be inspired because they are true, but Holy
Scripture alone can be affirmed to be true because it is inspired.
‘ You are quite free to make any use of this you see fit.
‘I am, yours most truly,
'S. Oxon.’
The above, which ‘ inexpressibly relieved ’ the minds of Mr. Fremantle
and others of the clergy, represents, we must suppose, what the Bishop
said on the second day. It is very difficult to understand from the above
letter what the Bishop really does hold on the subject of Inspiration.
But it is singular that such a master of rhetoric, upon a subject of such
grave importance at the present time, and which he himself, no doubt, had
fixed beforehand for the consideration of his clergy, expressed himself on
the first day so imperfectly, as to have been so seriously misunderstood—not
only by the sih? above quoted, viz. the reporters of the Standard and Herald,
the Oxfordshire and Oxford Rectors, the Rev. Messrs. Fremantle and
Cunningham,—but, it would seem, by the whole body of the clergy. As
the subject was known beforehand, it was not necessary that there should
have been any ‘cloudiness’ in the original statement, however brief. But
it is difficult to see how the view now put forth by the Bishop lessens any
of the more serious difficulties of the theory of 1 Scriptural infallibility,’
which, it would seem, (if I understand him rightly,) the Bishop still
maintains,—e. g. that which arises from Moses saying in D.v.22, ‘ These
words Jehovah spake unto all your assembly in the Mount out of the midst
of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, and He added no more;
and He wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me ’
—compared with E.xx.l, ‘God spake all these words, &c.’ which latter
1 words ’ differ materially from the former; comp, especially E.xx.11 and
D.v.15.
(8) In the Spectator of August 27, a letter appears from Oxoniensis,
from which I quote the following extract:—
‘ An article of great ability recently appeared in the Quarterly Review,
which is almost universally attributed, in part if not wholly, to the Bishop
of Oxford, It contains statements about Inspiration, which I believe to be
�APPENDIX.
79
perfectly wise and just. It is too long to quote, but its gist is that there is
a “human” as well as a “Divine” element in Scripture, and that humanly
the Scripture writers were liable to occasional error. The following are
some of the words:—“ In the utterance his own peculiarities will all be
present, and so his ignorance upon matters lying wholly outside the message,
as to which, therefore, the sender of the message has not enlightened his mes
senger. . . . When, for instance, St. Paul reveals to us the depths of the
Divine counsels, we know that we are listening, not to man, but to God.
. . . But, when the same apostle writes that the cloak which was left at
Troas should be brought after him, does any reasonable man really maintain
that, if it could be made certain that the cloak was left—not at Troas,
but—at another place, the veracity of Holy Scripture would be thereby
impugned ? ” ’
I add another extract from the same article in the Quarterly, April 1864,
p.552
1 If the intention of the Almighty was through His word to reveal reZagious truth to man, what would be more natural than that He should pour
into the minds of His instruments a flood of light upon those truths, which
He intended them to declare, leaving them still uninformed as to matters, of
which they were the bearers of no message to their brethren ? . . . On this
theory, as to whatever it (the Bible) professes to reveal, we know it must
be absolutely true, because in that it is the result of the inspiration of God ,•
whilst in that, which is the accident and not the object of the message, the
messenger is left to his own unaided powers.’
I need hardly say that this is precisely the ground, which I myself have
taken in all my writings. The ( religious truth,’ which God 1 intends to
reveal] that, and that alone, is the ‘ Word of God ’ in the Bible.
3. Extracts from the Fathers and others, shewing their
VIEWS AS TO THE LIMITATION OF OUR LORD’S
the
Son of Man:
KNOWLEDGE
AS
p.35.
For Mr. Houghton’s letter, with the references at full length, see my
Part HI on the Pentateuch, p.xxxviii-xl. The following are some of the
authorities which he quotes on the subject:—
‘ One must know that most of the Fathers—indeed almost all—appear to
say that He (Christ) was ignorant of some things; for, if He is said to be
in all respects of the same substance with us, and we are ignorant of some
things, it is manifest that He also was ignorant, and the Scripture says of
Him, that He increased in age and wisdom.’—Leontius.
‘To whom can it be a matter of doubt that He has a knowledge of that
hour, indeed, as God, but is ignorant of it, as man ? ’—Gregory Naz.
(As on becoming man He hungers and thirsts, and suffers with men, so
with men, as Man, He knows not.’—Athanasius.
�80
APPENDIX.
'The ignorance, then, does not belong to God the Word, but to the form
of the servant, which knew at that time such things as the indwelling
Divinity revealed.’—Theodobet.
°
We ought not to accuse the Word of God, and rashly to impute any
ignorance to Him. But we should rather admire His love towards man,
who did not refuse, out of His love towards us, to bring Himself down to so
great an humiliation, as to bear all things that are ours, one of which also is
ignorance. ’—Cybil of Alexandria.
* Just as Chbist took this upon Himself in common with men, to hunger,
thirst, and suffer the other things which are spoken about Him, exactly in
the same way
is nothing to offend any one, if He be said, as man, to have
been ignorant also in common with men.’—In.
' He is ignorant, then, according to His human nature, who knows all
things according to the power of His Divinity.’—Chbysostom.
Dr. Pusey, after stating what he considers to be the ' doctrine of the
Church ’ on this point says, on Atman. Diss. II. against Arianism (Library
of the Fathers), ch.xxviii:—
'However, this view of the sacred subject was received by the Church
after St. Athanasius’s day; and it cannot be denied that he and others of
the most eminent Fathers use language, which primd facie is inconsistent
with it. They certainly seem to impute ignorance to our Lord as man, as
Athanasius in this passage.’
But foi the doctrine of those which . . . only affirm that, though as
God He knew all, yet as man He was ignorant of some things, just in the
same manner as He was passible and subject to all human infirmities which
had not sin in them, . . . this sure is so far from heresy that ... it is the
[almost] unanimous assertion of all the Fathers.’—Hammond.
' To say that the Second Person in the Trinity knows not something, is
blasphemy; to say so of the Messias, is not so, who nevertheless was the
same with the Second Person in the Trinity.’—Lighteoot.
' Certainly, when the Apostle teaches that He (Jesus) was like to us in all
things, sin excepted, without doubt he comprehends this also, that His soul
was subjected to ignorance. ... In fine, unless anyone pleases to deny that
Chbist was made a true man, let us not be ashamed also to confess that He
voluntarily took upon Himself all things which cannot be separated from
human nature.’—Calvin.
' As it may be truly said of the body of man that it is not immortal,
though the soul be, so it may be truly said that the Son of Man was not
knowing, though the Son of God knew everything.’—Watebland.
In the face of all these authorities, however, the Bishop rides, Trial, p. 345
' I must decide that in imputing to our Blessed Lord [the Bishop does
not give my full statement, " as the Son of Man ”] ignorance, and the
possibility of error, the Bishop has committed himself to a subtle heresy.’
Let the reader notice that I have used identically the same language as
�APPENDIX.
81
Gregory Naz., Athanasius, Cyril, Chrysostom, and 1 others of the most
eminent Fathers,’ who, says Dr. Pusey, ‘ certainly seem to impute ignorance
to our Lord as man.’
4. Correspondence of the Bishop of Natal
Bishop of Oxford and the Bishop of Capetown :
with the
p.40.
Within a few days after my arrival in England, I received a letter from
the Bishop of Oxford, which, being marked 1 secret,’ I do not quote—except
so far as is rendered absolutely necessary, for my justification under the
present circumstances. In this letter, the Bishop said, with reference to
some points in my Commentary on the Romans :—
Gin these points I should greatly like calmly and prayerfully to talk
with you, if you will let me. They are too long for writing. But what I
mainly wish for now is, to pray you not to take any irretrievable step, until
you have, in free discourse with some of us, reviewed the whole matter. . . .
All I would ask for Christ’s sake is, that you rest not satisfied until you have
given us some such opportunity of free brotherly converse. ... If you could
come to me, to give a day or two to such a consultation, you would find a
warm greeting, and, I hope, a loving and unprejudiced discussion of
differences.’
To this affectionate appeal I was about to respond at once in the same
spirit, accepting heartily the invitation given, when another post on the
same day brought me a letter from the Bishop of Capetown, which seemed
to change wholly the character of the proposed discussion. It appeared to
me, in short, that, instead of being invited to a friendly conference, I was
about practically to be ‘ convened ’ by him, as Metropolitan, before a bench
of Bishops for my offences. And that I was not wrong in this supposition, is
shown by the fact, that the Bishop of Capetown did not correct my own
view of the matter, as expressed in my letters to him, copied below, and
that he still says, in the extract cited on p.39, from his Charge,—
1 He would not meet more than one [of the English Bishops], and then
not as if he were in any error, but only as a common seeker after truth.’
This language may be compared with the expressions of the Bishop of
Oxford—‘free discourse with some of us,’ ‘free brotherly converse,’ ‘loving
and unprejudiced discussion of differences.’
(i) As by submitting to be thus called to account by him, I should have
recognised indirectly the j urisdiction of the Metropolitan, I thought it my
duty to reply to the Bishop of Oxford and to the Bishop of Capetown,
as follows, Aug. 9, 1862
‘ To the Bishop of Oxford.
i I thank you most sincerely for your most kind and friendly letter. I
should be most happy to discuss any points in my Book on the Romans,
G
�82
APPENDIX.
either with yourself or any other brother Bishop, singly and privately ; though
I must confess that I do not anticipate much result from such a conference,
as the views which I have expressed in that book are, generally speaking,
not the result of a few years’ colonial experience, but have been long held
by me, have grown with my growth, and are, as I fully believe, quite com
patible with a conscientious adherence to the Articles and Formularies of
the Church of England. I do not think, however, that any good would
result from my meeting a number of Bishops together upon the subject, and,
therefore, would prefer declining your very kind invitation.
1 Under any circumstances, I am sure that you would be the last person to
wish me, for any personal reasons, to shrink from the confession of what I
believe to be the truth.’
To the Bishop of Capetown.
‘Just before your letter reached me, I had received one—a very kind one
—from the Bishop of Oxford, making a similar proposal. I should be most
haPPV t° meet any of my brother Bishops singly, and discuss with him any
portions of my Book on the Romans ; but for various reasons I do not think
it would be productive of any good result for me to meet a number of them
together, and I have written to that effect to the Bishop of Oxford.
‘ With respect to my other book ... it is quite true that I have been for
some time past deeply engaged in the study of the Pentateuch, and have
arrived at some startling results. I have had a portion of them privately
printed, for the express purpose of laying them before such of my friends in
England as would be most likely to be able to give me assistance and
advice in this matter, by possessing sufficient acquaintance with the subject,
and by being free from those strong prejudices, which would prevent their
discussing calmly and dispassionately with me the points in question. I
trust that I duly leverence both the Church and the Bible : but the Truth is
above both. I have already taken measures for submitting my views on
the Pentateuch to some of my friends, and shall be glad to do so privately
to any intelligent candid, and truth-seeking student. Among others, 1 had
thought of asking the Bishop of St. David’s to confer with me upon the subject.
But I am not prepared at present to propound my views prematurely to any
one.’
(ii) The Bishop of Capetown replied as follows, A
u
*g.
12, 1862 :—
‘I think you have not quite understood the object of my proposal. I
have been placed in great difficulties by the book [Commentary on the
Romans] you have published. People in England, and many of the Bishops
who have read it, are pained and shocked by it. They have thought, and
so have I, that the most Christian course was for those who were able to
do so, to meet you, and endeavour to convince you that you were in error.
1 If, by God’s blessing, they should succeed in this, it might lead to your
�APPENDIX.
83
withdrawing a book which so many think unsound, and render all other
jjroceedings unnecessary.
‘ I doubt much whether one Bishop would meet you (!), and I do hope that
you will not decline to meet any who wish to discuss the language used,
lovingly with you, as a Brother.’
As from the expression above italicised it was now plain to me that the
proposed proceedings, under the guise of a friendly conference, were really
intended to have a formal meaning, and to be, in fact, indirectly, an asser
tion of jurisdiction over me,—and as I did not believe that, in my Book
on the Romans, I had written anything which could warrant such a course
of conduct torvaids me, so that I must not so much as indulge the thought
that any Bishop of the Church of England would be willing to meet me
singly, in private, friendly, conference—I replied briefly, adhering to my
former resolution.
(iii) I now quote the Bishop of Capetown's answer, dated Aug. 20,1862 :
(I am very(gorry that you have come to the conclusion that you will not meet
the Bishops ; and I do earnestly hope that you will reconsider your decision.
‘ Just think what the position of this painful case is. You have pub
lished a work [on the Romans] which has distressed many, both in this
country and in Africa,—which has led some of your clergy to communicate
formally with me on the subject,—which, when examined, appears to me,
and the other Bishops of the Province, to contain teaching at variance with
that of the Church of which we are ministers, and which is, in consequence
referred by me to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and, through him, to cer
tain other Bishops for their opinion. These Bishops, without pretending to
sit in judgment upon the work, do, nevertheless, very generally [X.B°not
unanimously] concur in thinking that its teaching is extremely painful and
apparently not in accordance with that of the Church of England,—so much
so, indeed, that several of them have expressed themselves as unable, under
present circumstances, to admit you to officiate iu their dioceses. You may
be able, at an interview, to explain much that shocks the minds of others^-
or they may, if they should meet you, be able to convince you that yoJ
have expressed yourself unguardedly and unscripturally.
‘In the hope that by God's grace they might be able"to do this, men like
the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Oxford, the Bishop of Lincoln and
I doubt not, others too, would meet you, and endeavour to show you wheie
your error lies. If they should succeed, they would win a brother. If they
should fail, they would at least have used every effort to lead him back to
the truth, from which they believe him to have departed. Is not the course
proposed, of ‘ two or three ’ meeting you, the truly Christian and Scriptural
one ? And is it right to refuse to be a party to it ?
‘ The case is not an ordinary one. You cannot but be aware that you have
propounded views which are very startling—which you did not hold when
g
2
�84
APPENDIX.
you were consecrated—some of which have just been condemned by a legal
Court—and which it is impossible that the Church should silently acquiesce
in. It is not we who are the first to move in this matter. It is you that
have departed from your former standing-ground, and have been led to
adopt views, which l am sure you are far too honest to maintain are those of
the Church of England, and to propagate those views by your writings and
by word of mouth. As the guardians of the Church’s faith, we cannot but,
under such circumstances, plead with you.
‘ Forgive the freedom with which I write. There is, I believe, on
the part of the Bishops a very earnest desire to do what in them lies
to recover one who ... [I omit some complimentary expressions.]
I venture to hope that, if you are willing to meet the chief Pastors of
the Church at home in the same spirit in which they are prepared to
meet you, and to discuss with them those views which you have recently
adopted and propounded, good only would result from it. But I confess
that I do not see how they can consent to meet you, one by one, merely in a
private way, or treat the grave statements which you have made as open
questions. Many of these statements, however qualified by a different
language in other parts of your book, appear to all the Divines that I have
met with, who have studied your book, to be both unsound and dangerous.
You may be able to show them that you have been misunderstood, or you
may be led to qualify statements which we regard as rash and erroneous.
Do not lightly throw away the chance of setting yourselfbright, and settling
a matter of very great importance to yourself and to the Church.’
(iv) My reply to the above was as follows, dated August 27, 1862 :—
‘I received your last letter before I left Cornwall, but have delayed
replying that I might give its contents a due consideration. I thank you
most sincerely for the kind expressions which you have used towards myself
in it. I wish, indeed, that I were more worthy of them. But, as to the
main question, I am sorry to be obliged to say that I feel it due to myself,
and to my rightful position, to adhere to my resolution of declining to meet
a number of Bishops together in the way proposed.
‘I do so for the following reasons among others. I am so far from con
sidering that the views which I have expressed in my Commentary on the
Romans are contrary to the teaching of the Church of England, that—
as, indeed, I have already stated in the first letter which I addressed to you
from Natal in reply to yours, expressing your disapproval of my book,—I
entirely believe that what I have taught in that book I am permitted to
teach, within the liberty allowed me by the Articles and Prayer Book of
the Church of England, and with a conscientious adherence to the letter
and spirit of them. With, I think, two exceptions only, those views I held
as strongly, and preached them as plainly, when I was consecrated, as I do
now. On two points, I admit,—the Scripture doctrine of the Atonement,
�APPENDIX.
S5
and the subject of Eternal Punishment,—my mind has progressed with
advancing age, experience, enquiry, and meditation, to my present views.
But I have said nothing, as I believe, and as able and eminent divines assure
me, which can justly deserve the censures which some have passed upon my
book.
1 Of course, I am aware that the recent judgment of Dr. Ltjshington [in
“ Essays and Reviews ”] brings me under condemnation on certain points.
But you cannot surely believe that flat judgment will be maintained in the
Court of Appeal, when it obviously departs from the very principles which
the Judge himself laid down, and which the higher Court has laid down
in other cases. Mr. Grote’s pamphlet makes this abundantly plain. If,
however, it should be confirmed on these points, it will then be the dutv of
myself and a multitude of other clergymen, who have held and taught
views like my own, to decide on our future course.
‘Believing, then, that there is no real ground whatever for the opinion
that the views expressed in my Commentary on the Romans, however they
may differ from those of some of my episcopal brethren, ai’e in any way con
demned by the Articles and Formularies of the Church, and having already
entered into a full explanation on all those points, on which you expressed
objection to my teaching, in a letter which (I presume) has been laid before
the Bishops assembled to discuss my book, I feel that I should place myself
in a false position, if I should consent to be convened before a number of
Bishops in the way proposed, which would, in fact, amount to a recognition
of their right to interrogate me.
‘Nevertheless, as I have said, I shall be most glad to meet singly and
privately with any Bishop, who either from a sense of duty to the Church,
and to what he believes to be the truth, or from a feeling of charity to
wards a brother whom he wishes to “recover,” would be willing to meet
and discuss with me any of the questions raised in the Commentary. It
seems to me that this course will be most truly in accordance with the
Scriptural rule to which your letter refers.
‘ I was wholly unaware that Bishop Clavghton had joined in the con
demnation of my book, (though I knew that he did not agree with some of
my views), and certainly from his letters to myself I should never have
inferred it.
The only pain I feel is that of causing to yourself so much anxiety and
giief, in addition to your other vexations. But this God lays upon you
(and upon me also) in the'path of duty.’
(v) At the end of three weeks, I received this note from the Bishop of
Capetown, dated Sept. 17, 1862
‘ I think that I ought to tell you that the dear good old Bishop of St.
Asaph has expressed a readiness to discuss your views with you, if you
chose to visit him with a^view to that purpose, and that, although I have
�86
APPENDIX.
no commission from the Bishop of Oxford to say so, I cannot help feeling
that he would be ready to do the same. I cannot tell you how deeply I
grieve over the case.’
As the Bishop of Capetown must have discussed the whole matter with
the Bishop of Oxford, and ‘ had no commission from him ’ to say that he
would be -willing- to see me, of course the latter porti'on of the above note had
no meaning- for me under the existing- circumstances. For the Bishop of St.
Asaph I have the deepest esteem and respect, and, perhaps, I ought to have
gone to him for the purpose. But I was in London, he in Wales; and I
liaidly felt that, with a Prelate of his advanced years, a discussion upon my
Commentary would be likely to lead to any practical result, and I had no
leason to suppose that he had studied at all the criticism of the Penta
teuch. To the Bishop of St. David’s, whom I myself mentioned to Bishop
Gray, and whose learning might, indeed, have been profitably consulted
bv us, my proposal, as his Lordship has informed me, was never in any wav
communicated. 1 he fact was, as I believe, and as the above correspondence,
I think, will sufficiently evidence, that the Bishop of Capetown was
determined from the first to bring me to account, if possible, in some form
01 other, for my Book on the Romans,—which, though containing, as I
maintain, no single statement at variance with the Articles and Formu
laries, was yet very strongly condemned by himself and others, holding
extreme views in the Church on either side, both in England and in South
Africa. If I had consented to be thus ‘ convened,’ no doubt the act would
have been quoted, as my private letters have been, to show that I had
1 recognised’ the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan.
5. Letters from native converts, received by the Bishop
of
Natal
while in
England: p.5O.
From a native youth,
C)
1 Feb. 2, 1863.
(My Father,—I thank you very much for your reply to me about that
matter which I told you about [his marriage], and I too for my part wish
that you may come and settle that affair. Wre here are living verv happilv.
We rejoiced greatly at the arrival of Dulela [sent back from England]; she
arrived on J an. 6 : we asked of her the news about you, and she told us.
But we shall be very delighted when we see you all, through the mercy of our
God and Father. A little while ago I was sick for a time, Oct. 23,1862; and I
vent away home, but returned here ag-ain, Nov. 3, 1862. I began to print
the Gospel of Matthew, and finished it on Jan. 28, 1863. Now I am
printing the Gospel of Mark. Lingane is working upon the Book of Genesis;
and I think he works remarkably well. Llansi also is learning very well:
as far as I can see, I should say that he will learn well presently. But I
wish very much to hear when you will come back to us here; for we all
remember you exceedingly, longing that you may come immediately. I
�APPENDIX.
87
should like you to tell the Inkosikazi [Mrs. Colenso] that I am now
learning to play the harmonium; but I teach myself by myself; some tunes
too I am now able to play well when we worship. Also the Inkosikazi
[Mrs. Grubb] said to me that she would like me to help her in teaching
other people of an evening; so I teach them, Umpiwa there, and Simoi,
and Henry, another man of Mr. Robertson the teacher in Zululand. Again,
I have heard that now Umpiwa wishes to be admitted into the Church of
the Lord, and be baptized. I rejoiced very much at that. Salute for me,
&c.; all of ours here salute you very much. But all blessing and glad
ness are in the hands of God our Father, who is Almighty, of His great
mercy, to protect us well and all our brethren.’
i March 20, 1863.
Father,—I wish now to write to you about how we are going on at
Ekukanveni. I wish also to hear how you are going on in England. We
are all well: but I am just now in great trouble, because Llansi is going
away. I do not all complain of his being sent away : I am only very sorry
for it: for I see that I shall be without any one to help me, since Lingane
wishes also soon to go. But I have spoken with the Archdeacon, and
asked him to send for Mankentyane. The Archdeacon consented, and I
hope that M. will help nicely in what I want: besides I know that he is
much more expert than either Lingane or Llansi. But, as for Llansi, I did
hope that he would have helped me, and that I should have taught him
thoroughly according to your word: now, however, I am quite grieved at
the sad story of his going away. [Llansi had not committed any very
serious offence: but he was in fault, and it was thought most prudent to
send him away from the station, and he was then employed by a printer in
town.] We are very glad to hear of your welfare at this time; and we
trust that God will grant us through His mercy to see you again.
Glut, my father, about the matter of the gun, which I wished to buy, now
I see that I don’t much need it. I wish to leave it, and not to buy it now.
I don’t say that I leave it, because I see something else which I desire : I
wish to leave it simply because I don’t particularly want it. What I wish
now is to lobola [deposit cows for a girl whom he wishes to marry] a
little. Not that I want to marry immediately—I remember your advice to
“ wait till I am older.” I quite agree to this : I only wish to begin by de
grees. Therefore I should like you to tell ------ that I wish to use this
money of the gun for this purpose, since this affair is to be settled by you
as that of the gun was ; and, though I still wish for this gun, I wish also to
restrain my heart with respect to it, lest, perhaps, I should injure any one
with it.
‘ Salute for me Inkosikazi and all the children. Tell them that I shall
greatly rejoice to see them again through the mercy of our Father.’
(ii)
i My
�88
APPENDIX.
J-111)
_
‘April 29, 1863.
‘ My Lord, I rejoiced exceedingly to-day because we heard of your life
and your work there in England; for there arrived that letter of yours
which you sent to William, and we heard it all clearly ; it rejoiced us ex
ceedingly. . . . But one thing will gladden us especially ; we shall joy when
we see you heie again in Natal, since we have been looking for you exceed
ingly- • . . I am now at work with Mankentyane and Fani ; Lingane went
away a few days after Llansi’s departure ; but presently these two arrived.
They help me capitally. I am now in the middle of Luke: Mankentyane
has printed Genesis: Fani is stitching Prayer-books. This is how we are
working here. ... A few weeks past Undiane made a call, coming to ask
the Aichdeacon [Grubb] for a book, “ First Lessons in Science ” : I fancy
the Archdeacon gave him one. . , .’
The above three letters are translated literally from the original, written
in Zulu. I give now three letters in English from the same lad, verbatim
and literatim (the spelling not altered) as he wrote them. The reader
will judge whether there are signs here of any ‘progress,’ and any solid re
sult of my labours, observing that these letters indicate the present state of
things during my absence from the Colony, and that this lad was a little
naked savage when I first took him from the kraal. If a well-educated
Englishman finds it so difficult to write grammatical Zulu, how much more
difficult must it be for a native to write English !—when he has first to be
taught the very elements of grammar, and that by a teacher who can
scarcely explain his own meaning in the native tongue, and often knows
but little about grammar himself, or knows only the grammar of the English
tongue, which differs totally from that of the Zulu.
(iy)
‘Ekukanyeni, June 29, 1863.
‘ My dear Lord,—I have no time now to write all what I wish to say to
you, but I am very glad to see you writing, for I like very much to write
every word in English tongue, but I can’t do that, for I know not all the
sorts of English word.
‘ At this time I am very glad to my work, I have only Fani who help
me in the place of Mankentyane and Lingane. When Mankentyane was
just came here, he was with us only one month and half, when he hears
that the sickness of small pox will be at Natal he gone away, he left Fani
in his place, but I hope that Lingane will come to me if Fani go home.
‘ Jojo says that I better write and tell you that he is not at Ekukanyeni
now, he saw that his wife is very ill, and go to his friend to help him by
giving him. (Jojo) medicines to give his wife for she was very ill. But he
says that I tell you that he is not go away at Ekukanyeni, he only stay
for a few months for he fears that his wife will be ill again. He has a
child, her name is Unoziduli, I hope that she will grow very well by the
might of God. Jojo and his wife Nomvuzo says that I may salute you for
�APPENDIX.
89
them and Inkosikazi [and the children], as they hope that they will see
them again by the power of our Father.
‘ But, my Lord, the thing which I want to know about it, is this that I
want to know that, if I done all the copies of the book of New Testament,
what shall I do ? I say that for I don’t like to go away to some body, I
don’t like to leave Ekukanyeni. I say that for I see now I will done them
at April or May, 1864, I don’t know yet, only thinking. I want to know
if you will send some copies for me, for I want to work very much now I
am very oblige [desirous] to work my printing books in the printing-office.
‘ All the people salute you, my Lord, every person which know you salute
you. I hope to see you again, if God wills. Salute Inkosikazi for me,
please, and ask her that [whether] she will glad if I many? I think that
I will many for [in] few months, but I have no enough cows to give the
father of intombi yami [my girl]. Tell Inkosikazi that, if I marry, I will
ask something for my wife, for she is my mother indeed, and the intombi
says that I may salute for her to Inkosikazi her mother.
Salute Inkosikazi and children for me, tell them that I will write for them
all in next steamer. If God wills that we see you, we shall be glad.’
(v)
‘ Aug. 23, 1863.
‘ My dear Lord,—I am very glad this day that you send me this letter,
my heart is so fully rejoice to see it. At this time I know that you will
come back to us again, for if I take this your letter and look at it, I see
this to be sure that you wish for yourself to come again at Natal. ... I
have heard that Ngoza [a chief] want to bring here his boys. Now I am
only [alone] in the printing-office. Fani has go home at the end of last
July, and he left me alone, but though he is gone I am working comfortable,
and need nothing. I just print only [alone] like my doing when you was
here. You know that at that time I was only [alone] in the printingoffice. If God helps me I will do all that you told me to do. Now I
leave the New Testament, I want to [have] done the Book of Genesis be
fore [first]; when I done it, I shall go on the New Testament, and when
I done it, I will go on Exodus.
‘Salute Inkosikazi. . . . for me, and tell them that I will be very glad to
hear about them all right. All people who know you say ‘ Good bye.’ I
can’t count them for they are so many. If God of peace and love might
send our friends back to us, as it pleased Him, we shall be glad and rejoice,
through Christ Jesus, who is our Lord and Savior. Good by to every one.
I am your faithful servant.’
(V1)
‘ Bishopstowe [Ekukanyeni] : March 27, 1864.
‘ My dear Lord and Father,—I want to hear of your coming very much
at this time, for I heard not about your matter in England, only I know
that you shall come back again as you told me in last month’s, but I don't
�90
APPENDIX.
know which time you will be here. But, my Lord, my work in thislast month
goes very slowly, for I sent my proof to------ but he keep it for a long
time, and then I thought in my mind, I said, “it is better that (am do)=
[I do] for myself the jjroves which I printed,” and then I begin to print
Exodus, for
got my proof of the book of New Testament; but I
think to take that proof also to him, for it is right to me to do all which
is my business and finish it. For I can do the proves for myself, if there is
no man to take them. . . . But for myself I shall thank God if I see you
here in Natal again. But all our doings are in the hands of God our
Heavenly Father, to send our friends here again, that we may see one
another by God’s seeing [providence] and love. That is all now. I shall
be veiy glad to hear of your coming to us again. For we live here like as
children who have not their father and mother.
‘ This is the two sheets of the beginning of Exodus, which I had done
for myself, and try to do right, all the words, that they may [be] without
mistakes, as I try to do so.’
[In these two sheets, corrected by himself, there was only me small
printer’s error.]
The following is a literal translation of a letter, which I received from the
same youth by the last mail, reporting the proceedings of the Bishop of
Capetown, when he paid a visit to my residence.
(v^)
1 Ekukanyeni: May 29, 1864.
My Lord, I rejoiced greatly to hear your letter which you sent to
M illiam. I wish much that you would write to me also, that I may hear
clearly whether these people are speaking the truth, or no, about you. The
other day, May 10, there came the Bishop of Capetown along with Mr.
Robertson : they reached Ekukanyeni both together. And so Mr. Robert
son called William, saying he wished to see him. They came in both
together into the printing-office, and looked at my work. Afterwards we
went out together with them in the afternoon; and we talked with Mr.
Robertson, and asked “Where is the Bishop [of Capetown] going to?”
Said he, “Aha! that Bishop has come to put all things properly. For
Sobantu [the native name for the Bishop of Natal] has gone astray greatly;
I don t suppose that he will ever come back here.” Again he said, f<The
Bishop has come to tell the people to abandon the teaching of Sobantu;
for Sobantu has gone astray exceedingly; he has rebelled; he does not
believe in God our Father, and in Jesus Christ our Lord.” William and
I, however, contradicted, saying, “ As to Sobantu, we know that he, for
his part, is a man who believes exceedingly. When has that [which you
speak of] come upon him?” Said he, “When he was in England he
rebelled ; his book, too, speaks badly.”
11 wish, now, to hear plainly whether, indeed, they have spoken truth or
not, Mr. Robertson and others, to-wit, that you no longer believe. But I
�APPENDIX.
91
know that there is not a word of truth in what they say. Just the one
thing is, that we believe in God our Father, who knows everything.
‘As to my work, it is going on very well indeed. I should say that in
about another month I shall have finished this Book of Exodus which I am
now printing. But I have only a part of it here : I don’t know where the
rest of it is. I have here Ch. i-xxix. I don’t know anything about the
rest. LI did not translate the description of the details of the tabernacle, &c.].
After that I shall print the New Testament, beginning there at Luke [where
he had left off], and the others, until I have finished all that book of the
Histories, and the Acts of the Apostles, and Paul’s writings, and so on with
the others. After that I shall print the Book of Samuel ; when I have
finished that, there will be an end of the work which you set out for me.
But that will take some little time before I have finished those Books,
because I am working all alone. For my part I ask very much for monev,
that I may have a boy to help me, that I may work well.
‘Salute for me, &c.’
The following are literal translations of letters received from native
catechists, and will serve to show the tone of thought which I have en
deavoured to cherish among them, down to the last hour of my residence
in Natal.
(viii) ‘ 0 Nkosi [Sir] do you remember us here ? 0 Nkosi, I trust indeed
that v ou do 1 emember us. Ah I but, Nkosi, I am grieved because no tiding's
come to say when you will return. Bo not delay, Nkosi, lest it should seem
that you have gone away altogether. But, Nkosi, know this that there is a
longing, I cannot say how great, for you, ever since you went away. In
truth, there is a painful sense of desolation at your departure.
‘ Well, Nkosi, your people are living comfortably at present; but they are
looking for your return. It seems as if, when you shall have come, what
has now come short will be made to meet, what has bent down will be lifted
up, what is unfinished will be completed, yes, and what is sleeping by the
way will arrive.
But, Nkosi, as to the people in Maritzburg,—I mean, those who worship
in oui chapel [whom he taught],—they are doing well at all times; their
business goes steadily forward continually. There are also some of them
who are particularly attentive. There are five, too, who wish to be baptized.
But among those who wish to be baptized, one is very ill indeed in his
lungs.
‘ I salute all those of your house, yourself, and the Inkosikazi, and the boys
and the young ladies. All of my house salute; they look for your return;
and I, too, am looking for a word to say, “ I will return at such and such a
time.” ’
(ix) . . . Again, Nkosi, I hoped very much that, as soon as you reached
England, you would send a man at once, coming from you, to help me in
�92
APPENDIX.
Maritzburg, according to what we planned. And even now, Nkosi, if you
send him, I should be very glad.
Fuither, Nkosi, know that we all here desire to hear your word, that you
should send it among your people, and they may hear it, and rejoice at it.
By that they will think that you still remember them, and will rejoice at it,
just as that Paul did, you know, to his people. [The writer greatly admired
that Paul ; but he said that his epistles always made his headache,”
while helping me to translate them.] For there are many who worry us,
saying, 11 Sobantu will not return again ”; others say, “Sobantu—he is now
turned out”; others say, “ Sobantu—he is no longer a Bishop; he is no
longer a minister; he is just nobody. . . .”
1 Nkosi, farewell! May God, whom you serve, deal with you as He sees
good,—help you with His glorious might in all which you are doing,—be a
Father to you, and you be a child to Him, in the name of Jesus Christ our
Lord, who gives to us all! Amen.
‘'As to us here, we are living happily; but the one thing that we are
looking for is your coming. That is the one great thing above all others.
Farewell, my Lord.’
‘ Jan. 28, 1864.
(x) 1 May it please you, Nkosi, to answer a little to this which I am saying.
You know, however, that I would not urge you about answering if it cannot
be done. I desire to ask, “ When will you at length return ? Can you not
promise a little ? ” For you must know, Nkosi, from the time you went
away, people are talking continually, saying, “ Sobantu will never come
back.” But we, your flock, are looking for you with red [straining] eyes all
the days,—I say, all the months,—I say, all the years—of our life; we are
looking for your return, Nkosi Sobantu. However, Nkosi, supposing that
you will not return, say so, or supposing that you will return, say so, a
little. But Nkosi, do not think that I shall be satisfied to write to you
merely. No ! I don’t desire that at all. For the one thing, which I look
for more than anything else, is your coming—that alone, Nkosi. For, as to
this your departure, in you is the very sole excellence of our work, as to
which we had looked continually that it should go on and prosper,—I mean,
of course, the excellent great work, which is through our Lord Jesus
Christ.
So it is, Nkosi Sobantu., beloved by the baud of faith! I have no wish to
be [merely] writing to you continually. For I look for one thing, to be
brought about through the name of the Living God, which is looked for by
all the believers of ours—I mean, your return. For, Nkosi, it seems to me
that, if your return shall only be heard of as certain, it would be as if the
rain came, as if the sun shone, as if an eclipse happened, as if the earth were
overturned, as if the rivers had run dry, as if the sea had stilled its roaring,
as if all winds had ceased to blow, as if all were fair, as if all were clear-.
Foi, suiely, it is plain that it is right that one, who is a Bishop, should be
�APPENDIX.
93
here in the land; since he works for men, because that is his office, to
manage men. For some, truly, are trusted with the management of men :
others are trusted with the collecting of money. There are offices and
offices established in the workings of men. Farewell, my Lord ! I am still
alive, and I am one of yours at Ekukanyeni.’
This is the last letter of the same catechist, just arrived, which will show
the kind of work which the Bishop of Capetown has thought it right to
do among my poor native flock. Quid non relligio potuit!
1 Mav 29, 1864.
(xi) 11 have received your letter, Nkosi; I am very thankful for it. I
rejoice also because I find that you are well, both in body and soul. For
indeed, so it is, upon my word, that there is a great noise among all people
about you : some say, 11 Sobantu has rebelled ”; others say, u Sobantu goes
astray ” : ’tis so continually with them all.
‘But, Nkosi, see! do, I entreat, make a guess, and promise about your
return. For, you know, Nkosi, to expect and wait for you is but a short
matter: but, according to their talk, you will never more return at all.
‘Also the other day there arrived the Bishop of Capetown ; he just came
to have a look at Ekukanyeni, accompanied by Mr. Robertson. They went
also to the place of worship [St. Mary’s Native Chapel] in town, going to see
the people. We asked about Sobantu. But Mr. Robertson [by the Bishop’s
direction, of course, the latter not speaking Zulu] made a long discourse to
all the people : he said, “ Sobantu will never again come back : Sobantu
has rebelled entirely, he has gone astray. His going astray we white people
don’t wonder at; for it has been always so among the white people; there
are always arising people such as he.’’ Whereupon I asked, and said to
Mr. Robertson, “ What then ? do not you know Sobantu, that he is a
man who believes entirely in God?” He assented. Then said I, “Well
then, when did he begin to rebel, when he was in England, or here ? ” Said
he, “At the time he left this country, he had already begun to rebel; but,
when he arrived in England, be rebelled altogether.” I contradicted. But,
Nkosi, there was more which I cannot possibly write, the whole of it. ... .
‘Nkosi, I salute you very much. I remember you every day; I don’t
forget you for one single day. But to see a letter coming from you is quite
as if I were dreaming. Salute for me kindly to the Inkosikazi, salute for
me to the young ladies, salute for me to the boys, salute all those who love
us together with you. Oui’ Father, who is over all, preserve you, deliver
you from all, grant you that the wealth of the Holy Spirit may abound to
you.’
Here, lastly, is a note from another native catechist, who has been equally
disturbed by Bishop Gray’s proceedings.
(xii) ‘ My Lord,—It was pleasant to hear your words: for we were in a
�94
APPENDIX.
state of great excitement, not knowing what is the real state of the case. I
also said about you, Nkosi, it cannot possibly be true for us: for you had come
to bring light among those in darkness. I say, your doing was not like a
white-man ; it was like the words which say, 11 He sends forth His sun upon
evil and upon good,”—the way by which you came among us continually.
But before God our Father we may be comforted about you until we see
your face. . . . The sea is a great thing ; because, although we love you so
much, we cannot see you. Salute, &c.’
I venture to believe that the above letters give evidence of a solid and
permanent work, wrought by God’s grace, in preparing these natives for
future usefulness among their people. Their intellectual powers have been
cultivated, as well as their hearts : they have been taught to think about
religion, and not merely crammed with dogmatic formulae, although, in such
exercise of their reasoning powers, they have compelled me to give close
attention to difficulties, which in English teaching are too commonly passed
over or altogether ignored. But the reader will perceive that a tone of true
Christian feeling—of simple healthy piety—characterizes all these letters;
and the steady industry of the young printer, amidst all his difficulties and
discouragements, is to me most refreshing and hopeful, as a sign of real
‘ progress. ’
6. Proposed alteration of the Supreme Court of Appeal :
p.63.
The Bishop of Capetown says of the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council, Charge, p.12:—‘ The Judgment, which it has just given, in oppo
sition to the Archbishops and the voice of Convocation, has convulsed the
Church of England, and is forcing her to repudiate its decision, and to
demand an alteration in the Court of Appeal
*
* The Bishop also says, Charge, p.12:—‘Is not the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council the final Court of Appeal for the Church of England ? In certain
cases it is so, with the presence of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and
the Bishop of London. For the last thirty years, by a mere oversight, as Lord
Brougham has stated publicly in the House of Lords, it has been so.’ It must,
have been, however, a happy oversight, even in the opinion of Lord Brougham, if
the following statement of Dr. Manning is correct, Letter, &e., p.7: ‘The late
Bishop Blomfiekd introduced into Parliament a Bill to amend the Appellate
Jurisdiction of the Crown in matters of Doctrine. By that Bill it was provided
that in all such questions the matter of Doctrine should be divided from the matter
of Law, and that the Doctrine should be adjudged by the Bishops, the Law by the
Judges of the Privy Council. . . . Lord Brougham spoke against the Bill. He
said, with plain English common sense, that the Bishops would constitute no
sufficient tribunal for questions of controverted Doctrine, because they might divide
in equal numbers, and give, therefore, no decision, or by a bare majority, which
�APPENDIX.
95
There is certainly & party in the Church which ‘demands’ such an altera
tion, and in no very mild terms. Thus Dr. Plsey writes in his recent
manifesto,, p. 18:—'■ Will the Church of England require that the Court,
which has shown itself so partial, so dishonest,—which, had it been a
matter of human property, would not have dared so openly to profane
justice,—should be reformed?’ But the following are the views of the
Bishop (Waldegrave) of Carlisle on this question, Charge, p.48 :—
1 A third party have—without avowing the purpose, though I can hardly
think without contemplating the result—availed themselves of the present
season of disquiet, for advocating a modification of the constitution of the
Court of Appeal, which would certainly issue, and that at no distant date,
in the dis-establishment—and, be it well remembered, in the dis-endow
ment also—of our National Church............. This would be nothing less than
to supersede the teaching of our written formularies, unmoved as they ever
are and must be by the tempests of party and passion, by the opinion of
living men, who cannot but be liable to be swayed by all the tumultuous gusts
of the fleeting hour. Would our Laity, think you, for one moment tolerate
the existence of such a tribunal ? . . . I, for one, can have no sympathy
with men, who had rather that all things should be brought to a standstill,
than that any the least alteration should be made which does not fully and
exactly tally with the day-dreams of their own ambitious imaginations.
And such men there still are at work amongst us. They were, until recently,
regarded with a just and an universal suspicion, as animated by that spirit of
sacerdotal absolutism, which, more than two centuries ago, involved our
Church and Kingdom in a common overthrow. The notable zeal with
which, all the while retaining a cordial dislike to the distinguishing
doctrines of the Reformation, they have thrown themselves into the antirationalistic movement, has caused too many to condone their errors, and
thus given them the opportunity, of which they have been by no means
backward to avail themselves, of silently urging onward their cherished
scheme of un-protestantizing the National Church. Of this scheme it is
difficult not to believe that this plan of ecclesiastical-law-reform is an inte
gral portion.’
Among those, who are most violent in ‘ demanding ’ this reform, is
the Ven. Archdeacon Denison, one who signed the famous Anglican
‘ Declaration,’ with reference to the ‘ Gorham Judgment,’ in common with
Dr. Ptjsey, Dr. Newman, Dr. Manning, and nine others, of whom, says Dr.
Manning,
to an Anglican Friend, p.l, ‘six afterwards submitted to
would carry no moral conviction to any one, or the majority, however great, would
not tell by number against a minority, in which were found the few of known
learning and influence, with whom public opinion would certainly go. The end of
the Bill might have been foreseen. It was rejected with an overwhelming rejection,
not only of opposition, but of arguments.’
�96
APPENDIX.
the Catholic [Boman] Church, four are no more, and five are still Angli
cans.’ By the ‘ Declaration ’ it was affirmed, that, if the Church of England
acquiesced in the Gorham Judgment, ‘by such conscious, wilful, and
deliberate act’ it would ‘become formally separated from the Catholic
Body, and could no longer assure to its members the Grace of the Sacraments
and the Demission of Sins.’ The Church of England has acquiesced in
that judgment: but both Dr. Pvsey and Archdeacon Denison still remain
as clergymen of the Church of England. It is to Archdeacon Denison,
however, that the Bishop of Capetown has applied, for six additional
clergy to be planted in my diocese : so at least I infer from a letter in the
Guardian of Aug.31, bearing, as signature, the motto of the Archdeacon’s
journal (Church and State Review), ‘ Pro Ecclesia Dei.’ At any rate, it
is plain that it is intended to take advantage of my absence, to force upon
my diocese, if possible, a number of clergy holding ‘extreme views of
Church and State,’ such as those which are held by Archdeacon Denison
and Dr. Prsey, as well as by Bishop Gray and the Natal correspondent of
the Guardian.
With reference to this point, I think it right to say that, it is my purpose,
with the Divine assistance, on my return to my diocese, both to maintain
inviolate, as far as shall lie in my power, all rights, spiritual or temporal,
belonging to me as its Bishop, and, at the same time, to consult for its
religious peace and quietness, by overlooking, wherever possible, all offences
against its ecclesiastical order, which may have been committed during my
absence. These offences have mainly arisen from the intrusion of another
Bishop into the affairs of my diocese.
The Bishop of Capetown, however, has no more authority over my
diocese, than I have over his, except so far as it shall have been lawfully
given him by the Crown, of which the Judicial Committee of Her Majesty’s
Privy Council will be the judges. Accordingly, his appointment of clergy
to minister in the diocese of Natal would, if illegal, give them no mission :
in pretending to give it, he would be the author of a Schism: his own clergy,
who might affect to support him, and any Society at home, which should
furnish stipends to persons so nominated, and exercising their functions
without my Licence, would be its abettors.
In many periods of ecclesiastical history we meet with examples of
Bishops charging each other with heresy, and defying each other with
mutual excommunications. I shall endeavour always to avoid following the
example of this unseemly kind of warfare. But I feel called upon to
caution some, who might, perhaps, otherwise be led away, against abetting
proceedings ecclesiastically irregular and schismatical,—politically seditious,
—injurious to the cause of religion and to the progress of Christianity,—
and hurtful individually to the religious life of all who promote them.
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., PRINTERS, NEW-STREET SQUARE, LONDON.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Remarks upon the recent proceedings and charge of Robert Lord Bishop of Cape Town and Metropolitan at his primary metropolitan visitation of the diocese of Natal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Colenso, John William [1814-1883]
Gray, Robert [Bishop of Cape Town]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: [4], 96 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Appendix 1: extracts from the Bishop of Natal's Books. 2: Opinions of Various Writers in the Church of England Respecting the Authorship of the Pentateuch. 3: Extracts from the Fathers and Others, Shewing their Views as to the Limitation of our Lord's Knowledge as the Son of Man. 4: Correspondence of the Bishop of Natal with the Bishop of Capetown. 5: Letters from Native Converts, received by the Bishop of Natal while in England. 6: Proposed Alteration of the Supreme Court of Appeal. Printed by Spottiswoode and Co., New Street Square, London.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts & Green
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5199
Subject
The topic of the resource
Heresy
Trials
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Remarks upon the recent proceedings and charge of Robert Lord Bishop of Cape Town and Metropolitan at his primary metropolitan visitation of the diocese of Natal), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Bible. O.T. Pentateuch
Robert Gray
Trials (Heresy)