66

to the robbery of our birthrights, and to the forfeiture of our heritage in the Church, to the stifling of our conscience and duty, as well as to the suppression of our feelings. Protest-remonstrance-boldness for what they think to be the truth-all these rights are to be cheerfully conceded to the sticklers for private judgment, but the obedient sons of the Church alone are to be silenced just because they are obedient; their feelings and sore trials are never to be recognised, far less to be yielded to, only because the Bishops know that they will submit to almost anything to avoid the faintest show of resistance to authority as such. However, as somebody bitterly said, we forget where, a willing horse may be over-driven :" and it seems that the perilous experiment is now trying how far and how long the galling harness is to be on our shoulders. At any rate, we cannot but express our deep fears that those who least apprehend the results of their tampering, and compromise, and indifference, are ruining the Church of England, under the specious pretence of moderation. It will be of little use to complain of disloyalty to the Church in some quarters, while to be loyal to her true principles is to be proscribed and suspected: when we have repelled and silenced our best and warmest hearted by our icy indifference to zeal; so long as we encourage fanaticism, if it has but a popular and noisy show, reserving the averted look and suspicious jealousy only for those who want but encouragement to spend and to be spent for the Church's sake; it is vain to ask for more than sullen submission even to episcopal requirements. We shall, it may be, drive out from among us, as we have already reduced to dull indifference, the best spirits of the Church of England, if we are to act henceforth upon a desire to please all parties; we shall fall unpitied if our principle is to be the negation of all principle.

We have some difficulty in presenting a sketch, within moderate limits, of the connexion of the Church Missionary Society with the Scotch schismatics. At the time of their separation from the Church, Mr. Drummond and Sir William Dunbar were secretaries of two branch associations; this office they still retain. The latter was formally, the former virtually, excommunicated by his Bishop; and each becomes the head of a schism. How was the Church Missionary Society to treat them? Mr. Dandeson Coates, the Secretary, a person, we are bound to remark, of singular and serpentine astuteness, tells us,

"These gentlemen, being Clergymen of the Church of England, united themselves with the Scottish Episcopal Church, but have since withdrawn from that union, to minister to their respective congregations upon their English orders; a question has since arisen, in consequence of such withdrawal, respecting their ecclesiastical position in Scotland. Upon this question the Committee conceive that they are neither competent, nor called upon, as a committee, to form ANY judgment. In conformity with the views above stated, a deputation from the parent committee visiting Scotland will communicate with Mr. Drummond and Sir W. Dunbar in common with the other local officers of associations, and cooperate with them in the business of the Society. But in order to preserve the NEUTRALITY of the Society upon the ecclesiastical question at issue, it appears necessary that the deputation should not preach as representatives of the Society in Scotland during the present year."

The last clause, after a not very sinewy remonstrance from the Bishop of Edinburgh, who, however, openly avowed his intention to draw no distinction between "what the deputation did as representatives of the Society, and what they did in their individual capacity," was subsequently modified into

"It further appears that the clerical members of the deputation should also abstain from preaching while on this visit to Scotland, even in their individual capacity."

This is the first branch of the history, and the least painful, however in itself shocking; but the proceedings of the Church Missionary Society are to be judged of by a standard of its own. Bishop Terrot thinks that he is adequately severe in "not thanking the Society for their neutrality;" we wish that he had thought proper to speak out. Neutrality! Not only is the Society's own account of the matter the very reverse of neutrality, but neutrality, were it possible, were a sin. To speak of Sir W. Dunbar as "withdrawing from his union with the Episcopal Church," and "ministering to his congregation on his English orders," and to mince over his "ecclesiastical position as a question," is to be his advocate, and nothing less; the Dunbarites ask for no more than to leave these points open. "Neutrality!" and "not competent to form any judgment!" What, a Church Society, with Archbishops and Bishops at its head, neutral about an excommunicated and schismatical priest! When Hymenæus and Alexander were delivered to Satan, what would St. Paul have said if Aquila and Apollos had "preserved their neutrality ?"

But another matter arose during these discussions. Mr. Bickersteth, of Watton, thought proper to volunteer a deputation of himself from the Church Missionary Society, to sympathize, after the Canadian fashion, with Dunbar and Drummond, and to preach for the Church Missionary Society at their respective conventicles. This the Society thought proper to decline, that is, as far as words went. They appointed a subcommittee to remonstrate with the inexorable Mr. Bickersteth, and disavowed, in smooth set phrase, his self-elected mission. But, curiously enough, when a straightforward proposition was made in the Church Missionary Society to repudiate Mr. Bickersteth by something more practical than fine words, i. e. by refusing to accept the collections which he made in the Scotch meeting-houses, from the Drummondites, this intelligible and decisive motion was rejected. The Church Missionary Society had not heart enough, nor honesty, to make broad plates for the altar of the offerings of the Scotch Corah and his company. They found it convenient to have an orthodox and schismatical partner at the same time; to come out alternately as occasion required, like the figures in a Dutch weatherhouse, or like Messrs. Greenhorn and Grinderson in the "Antiquary." And this was another tolerably intelligible illustration of Mr. Dandeson Coates's neutrality. However, to make the briefest of a tedious story, for it concerns us but little to enter into the miserable subterfuges of the London Committee of the Church Missionary Society, or the proceedings of the Edinburgh auxiliary,

or the very questionable propriety of the formation of a new one by Bishop Terrot, which he has thought proper, without consulting his brethren, to designate as the "Episcopal Church of Scotland's Church Missionary Society,'

On Sunday, April 21, Mr. Bickersteth, of Watton, preached twice in Sir W. Dunbar's conventicle to overflowing congregations of " free kirk" people and others, declaring "that it was impossible for him to estimate the honour and privilege which he felt in supporting Sir W. Dunbar under his present circumstances." Need we say what confidence this proceeding has given the adherents of this unhappy man? especially as for the last month he had been preparing his people for the coming of the eminent Mr. Bickersteth, who would tell them upon "what footing he was still regarded in England." Nor was this all.

The Church Missionary Society held its anniversary at Aberdeen, about the same time: large bills were circulated, bearing the Archbishop of Canterbury's name, as vice-patron of the Church Missionary Society, in immediate connexion with Sir W. Dunbar's as local secretary; and among all classes, except the insignificant minority of churchmen, this most wicked fraud has succeeded; and the impression has gone forth among the whole society of the north of Scotland, that the Bishop of Aberdeen's excommunication is good for nothing; and that the Archbishop of Canterbury has sent down Mr. Bickersteth, to show the state of feeling in the Church of England in this matter. So much for the neutrality of the Church Missionary Society! Indeed, we do not see that the consequence drawn at Aberdeen is quite so absurd as we shall be told; the Archbishop is in full communion with the Church Missionary Society, and the Church Missionary Society retains, as one of its secretaries, Sir W. Dunbar, and, therefore, is in full communion with him.

This certainly brings Sir William and his Grace into a connexion rather too close to be summarily disposed of. His Grace is the patron of those who employ an excommunicated man as secretary; and, before these pages are published, the Bishop of London will preach the anniversary sermon for this same Church Missionary Society, on April 29th, at St. Bride's, London. Certainly we regret this step, more than we care to say;-its results we are afraid to anticipate, in the way of unsettling men's minds; but if anything can, which seems doubtful, excuse us in England, it is the conduct of some portion of the Scottish Church. Had Bishop Terrot indignantly disavowed the Church Missionary Society, till it had disavowed Drummond and Dunbar,-had he refrained from tying himself to it by another link, for the same reason,-had he not only "not thanked" the Society for the "neutrality" (which he acknowledged, nevertheless), but had he shown its hollowness and folly, then no Christian bishop could have remained in connexion with the Society. But English responsibility is much lessened, though not destroyed, while the Scotch prelates-certainly the parties most concerned-are

NO. XLI.-N.S.

4 c

thus temporizing and trimming; until they are at least at one, it may be hoped, rather than expected, that our Bishops should take a decided stand. If the collective Scottish college of Bishops had openly renounced the whole Church Missionary Society, and resolutley closed every pulpit in Scotland to every English Clergyman acting on its behalf, till the connexion between its executive and Drummond and Dunbar was at an end, then the English Bishops must have moved, or the Church Missionary Society must have yielded. We cannot understand how, as matters now stand, any churchman can remain a member of the Church Missionary Society. But we can quite believe that the irresolute conduct of the Scottish Church has not been without its influence on those who are not sorry for any apology for not interfering. Until Scotland understands its own affairs, and acts accordingly, it is premature to call us inactive, and other than affectionate towards her. While the Bishop of Edinburgh, by such practical approval, avows his aatisfaction with the Society; while the Primus of Aberdeen does not openly and solemnly cut off the Society from communion with his Church,-especially Mr. Bickersteth,-it is too much to expect us to move, as vindicators of the Scottish Church. When she is true to herself, we will be true to her but we hold it very unreasonable, as matters stand, to expect that the English Bishops can, or, without appeal and remonstrance, ought to, fight their battle, which, in truth, is Scotland's rather than our own at present.

Though, after all, the main matter is with ourselves in another way; we have introduced this subject only as an illustration of our old argument, that, if defection in one, or in one hundred instances, is to occur from us, we have only ourselves to blame. We will not so much justify, as point to, the fact of the existence of fears, whether well or illfounded, in the breasts of those who are neither ignorant, nor idle, nor wanting in the sense of personal responsibility, that, as a Church, we cannot afford, salrâ essentia, to move one hair's breadth further in a more Protestant direction; we purposely abstain from alluding to retrograde steps; and yet more, that we are committed to and by the actions and sentiments of our Bishops. If, then, his Diocesan is to exhibit "neutrality" towards Mr. Bickersteth, or if the Church Missionary Society is to be permitted to continue its present standing towards the Scottish Church, we can rather anticipate than describe how this recognised state of things will tell upon the Church of England. Were we, which we are not, friends of Rome, we could desire nothing more heartily than its continuance. Let the new institution of Scripture Readers for London, under the highest auspices, be viewed in the same light.

563

The Natural History of Man; comprising Inquiries into the Modifying Influence of Physical and Moral Agencies on the different Tribes of the Human Family. By J. C. PRITCHARD, M.D. &c. London: Bailliere. 1843. I vol. pp. 556.

Its

THE design of this elegant and able work is to furnish the general reader with a clear and comprehensive, though brief view, of all the physical characteristics of the human race. learned and industrious author has here drawn up a sufficiently popular account of the chief varieties in colour, figure, and bodily structure, which distinguish the several classes of men from each other; together with illustrative notices of their moral and intellectual peculiarities. The science of Ethnography is still in its infancy; but, as far as the present state of our knowledge extends, Dr. Pritchard has ably investigated the nature, and traced the causes, of the different phenomena which his subject embraces. Hence he has been carried into historical researches, and has followed the different tribes of people scattered over the world, from their origin, along their several lines of descent. The work is profusely illustrated with coloured engravings and wood cuts; which render it a very handsome volume, suited for the drawing-room table no less than the shelf of the library.

The varieties of the human race are truly astonishing; and indicate extraordinary powers of adaptation to almost every diversity of climate and situation. While man exerts a powerful command over the powers and resources of the material world, that world hardly less powerfully re-acts upon him; moulding his physical organization, and adapting it to even opposite modes of life. "Hence it comes to pass," observes Dr. Pritchard, "that man is a cosmopolite; that while, among the wild inhabitants of the forest, each tribe can exist only on a comparatively small tract of the earth's surface, man, together with those creatures which he has chosen for his immemorial companions, and has led with him in all his wanderings, is capable of living under every clime, from the shores of the Icy Sea, where the frozen soil never softens under his feet, to the burning sands of equatorial plains, where even reptiles perish from heat and drought.... How different a being is the Esquimaux, who, in his burrow amid northern ices, gorges himself with the blubber of whales, from the lean and hungry Numidian, who pursues the lion under a vertical sun! And how different, whether compared with the skin-clad and oily fisher of the icebergs, or with the naked hunter of the Sahára, are the luxurious inmates of Eastern harems, or the energetic and intellectual inhabitants of the cities of Europe!"

So numerous are these changes, so strongly marked are the