help from England, to drive the other party into the sea; and verily, judging from a good deal that has gone on from time to time on Irish soil, one almost fancies their boasting has some truth in it. As we said, the story is a very simple one. The reader can easily supply for himself the sighs, and groans, and weary watchings, and sickness of hope deferred; and on the other side the rage of the enemy when they found they made so little way. All these things, which our special correspondents deal in so largely, the writers of that day left to the poets to tell in "moving verse." Prose was then (according to the old Greek model) simple and chastened. Our redundancy of ornament and colouring would have disgusted an Elizabethan. Nevertheless the history tells its tale all the same, and that tale gives us a record of English heroism (of which, thank God, we have examples all the world over), and also shows the miserable folly of ever expecting to do anything effectual in a "war" in which all the wealth and resources of the country would be on one side, and on the other nothing but reckless inexperience, without the means of besieging even a place like Tralee, or even of storming a single police barrack.

Look at the north of Ireland, full of men accustomed to the use of arms, only waiting the signal to fall destructively on those who are so ready to brave them, knowing them to be "chained up." Look at the network of police, and soldiers, and landlords and their belongings, everywhere spread over the south, ample enough to keep the country against all the foes within and any who can possibly arrive from without, and say if Fenianism is not, of all the "isms" which have afflicted Ireland, the very maddest. But then the evil is, that we read these stories and argue upon them; the men whom we would fain influence for their good do not read them. They tell over the old tales of Ossianic heroes, and solace themselves with the legends of Ireland's early glories, till they come to think that they are all children of kings, that there is no such race anywhere else in the world, and that it is their right to rule Ireland, if not England into the bargain. What a pity they won't look a little nearer the present, and see how in every struggle-even in such a little matter as our siege -the English have always gained the day! Why will they not learn the lesson of these Elizabethan and Stuart wars-viz., that they have met with a stronger race than themselves; and that, having done so, their best wisdom is to submit?

Sometimes o'er the troubled waters

I have thought I heard thy voice,
Calling, "Cheer thee, brother, cheer thee;
Thou shalt yet rejoice,

Yes, rejoice with me!"

But again the dark clouds gather,

And again the billows roll,

Shutting out the distant prospect,
Shutting in my soul.
O, I envy thee!

JAMIA PITT MUD AM AMIMA TI2”
Ah! another voice is calling

High above the tempest's roar;
And a glorious Form is standing
On the distant shore:-

Yes, my soul, to thee He callethut T
Thou shouldst know those accents blest-
"He that to the end endureth

Wins the promised rest."

WHO WAS THE FOUNDER OF SUNDAY

SCHOOLS?

BY S. R. TOWNSHEND MAYER, F.R.S.L.

THE Bishop of Oxford, in a recent article on Sunday schools, says, "Few of the moral powers which have acted for the last sixty or seventy years upon our population have done more for its benefit than they have effected. Those who felt their power in the zenith of their usefulness were never weary of speaking of their great results, and venerated Mr. Raikes almost as an apostle." And he subsequently repeats that in 1783 "Mr. Raikes of Gloucester became their apostle."*

Now Horace Walpole, in his "Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of Richard III.," says there is "a kind of literary superstition which men are apt to contract from habit, and which makes them look on any attempt towards shaking their belief in any established character, no matter whether good or bad, as a sort of profanation. They are determined to adhere to their first impressions, and are equally offended at any innovation. No indulgence is granted to those who would ascertain the truth. The more testimonials on either side have been multiplied, the stronger is the conviction; though it generally happens that the original evidence is wondrous slender, and that the number of writers have but copied one another, or, what is worse, have only added to the original without any new authority. Attachment so groundless is not to be regarded; and in mere matters of curiosity it were ridiculous to pay any deference to it. If time brings new materials to light, if facts and dates constitute historians, what does it signify that we have been for two or three hundred years under an error? Does antiquity consecrate darkness? Does a lie become venerable from its age? Historic justice is due to all characters."

Actuated by the spirit of this last axiom, I am desirous of doing justice to a man whose claims to be considered a benefactor to his species have been very generally ignored. Everywhere we see Robert Raikes described as the "founder of Sunday

* Good Words, April, 1868.

schools." This description I conceive to be in a measure unmerited. He was not alone in his noble work; and without wishing in the slightest degree to depreciate his share in the undertaking, unquestionably some tribute is due to the memory of his less-known coadjutor, the Rev. Thomas Stock, rector of St. John and St. Aldate, Gloucester, whose name should be associated with that of Raikes in grateful recognition.

With whom the project originated of assembling the children of the very poor, to be found in the suburbs of Gloucester, half clothed, half fed, and abandoned to every vicious practice, at the early Sunday morning service in the cathedral, and by degrees disciplining them into a due observance of at least the outward ceremonies of religion, will be found to be matter for widely varying conjecture. But that these estimable men worked together, each according to his means, in carrying out and perfecting that blessed scheme, we have sufficient direct testimony to show.

Neither of the Gloucester worthies, indeed, can be credited with having first put forth the idea of Sunday school teaching, as we find a school, which would appear to be the first on record, established in 1763-4, in Catterick, Yorkshire, by the Rev. Theophilus Lindsey, conjointly with a benevolent lady named Cappe, of Bedale, in the same county. A Miss Hannah Ball, of High Wycombe, also opened and carried on successfully a Sunday school in her native town in 1769; and her pious example was followed by a humble individual named James Heys, more generally known by the familiar appellation of " Old Jemmy o' th' Hey," who lived in the village of Little Lever, near Bolton, Lancashire, and who in the year 1775 instructed the poor "bobbin-boys" or "draw-boys," on the Sabbath, in reading and spelling. The cottage of a neighbour afforded a front room large enough for the purpose, and was cheerfully granted. There "Old Jemmy" met his pupils-children and young folks-morning and afternoon, every Sunday, the time of assembling being announced by the ringing, not of a bell, but of an excellent proxy-an old brass pestle and mortar !

But although Stock and Raikes cannot be said to have opened the first Sunday school in the kingdom, they may justly divide the credit of originating the system. For, as has been truly observed," whilst the existence of the few previous establishments of the kind already referred to was known only in their immediate localities, the success which attended the first Sunday school established in the ancient and important city of Glou