were very charitable, giving, without distinction of sect, food and medicine, and every other assistance." Mr. Foster says"The clergy settle the disputes of the Roman Catholics, lend them money, distribute medicine, and superintend various charities." And Major Woodward, Inspector of Prisons, says “I must, as a public officer whose duties call him into close contact with the people through the most remote and deserted parts of the kingdom, declare, in common justice, that were it not for the residence and moral and political influence of the parochial clergy, all trace of refinement and civilization would disappear."

We should wish to see some great effort made for extending the agency of the Irish Church; an effort emanating from and headed by our Bishops. This, we feel persuaded, and we have not given the subject a transient or hasty consideration, is the only practicable remedy for the evils of the sister island. This would effectually infuse light and civilization, pure and undefiled religion, and its myriad of attendant blessings, throughout the entire mass of the population; and if this effort be but supplemented by an extensive system of protection (protection especially for converts from Popery, on whom the hottest vials of barbarous persecution are sure to be poured)-a system perfect in its organization, and while it is rendered thoroughly practical and efficient, it is likewise made subservient to ecclesiastical institutions, and under the direction, patronage, and jurisprudence of influential members of the Established Church, we see no reason to doubt the complete renovation of Ireland, and the elevation of the character of her people to an unprecedented height of moral greatness. Domestic tranquillity, the comforts and blessings of social life, the pure and hallowed feelings of confidence and peaceful satisfaction in existing institutions, the free and legitimate exercise of conscience, prosperity, happiness, and peace would crowd the country, and an atmosphere of piety be flung around every cottage in the land.

We shall conclude with quoting the memorable words of Lord Lansdowne, when proposing to place in every parish of Ireland a resident minister:

"If any improvement is to be effected in the condition of Ireland, it must be effected through the instrumentality of the Church, through the residence of a parochial clergy. I consider the permanent residence of a Protestant clergyman on his living to be most beneficial in its results. I can assure the House that the utility of having a Protestant

*The Irish Protestant Tenantry Society" appears to have been established for the purpose of affording protection to Irish Protestants and converts from Popery. We wish it every success and support.

minister permanently resident among his flock, even though he may not be the minister of religion to the majority of his parish, will be beyond all calculation. The Protestant clergyman will be to his parish a minister of peace; for he will, by his station and his constant residence, have constant opportunities of conciliating their good will, by sympathising in their cares and distresses, and by doing them a variety of good offices. If we strip the Protestant parochial clergy of all those causes of irritation which exist as to the exaction of tithes; if we relieve the Establishment from the odium attached to it in consequence of the collection of vestry cess; if we place in every parish in Ireland men of independence as parochial priests, we shall establish a firm link of connection between the Protestant clergy and the Catholic popula tion, which will be found most advantageous to the Established Church, and which will lead to the welfare and happiness of the people of Ireland."

ART. III.-The History of Protestant Nonconformity in England, from the Reformation under Henry VIII. BY THOMAS PRICE, D.D. In two vols. 8vo. Vol. II. London: William Ball. pp. 647. 1838.

WHEN we closed our remarks on Mr. Price's former volume, we were not aware that we should so soon be called upon to meet him again. Since the first volume was completed, it appears that our author has acquired the distinguished honour of a Dissenting D.D.; for on the title-page of that volume stand in all their simplicity the words THOMAS PRICE; while on that of the second the above distinction is appended to the name. We know not how Dissenting degrees are conferred, nor are we acquainted with their value; but we do know, that the late Robert Hall, though the degree of D.D. had been conferred upon him by a Scottish University, declined the use of it even to the day of his death. Dr. Price, as we must now term him, may have merited this honourable distinction by the former volume of his History, or by his laudable exertions as the Editor of that organ of Dissent, the Eclectic Review. By the way, we may observe that, on several very important subjects, the sentiments broached in the Eclectic and those contained in this history exactly coincide.

In the Preface to the former volume our author states his determination to conclude his labours in two volumes. The second, however, terminates with the Restoration, and without entering on any of the numerous important ecclesiastical affairs involved in that event. We are informed in the second Preface, considered as complete, though the

that the work may be

author, without, however, giving any pledge, will feel himself at liberty to usher into the world another volume on the Modern History of Nonconformity. We have ancient and modern universal histories; but we never heard, till now, of the ancient and modern history of Nonconformity.

The Preface to the present volume confirms us in an opinion which we have long entertained, namely, that it is not possible for a Dissenting historian to be free from party bias, or to write with impartiality. As writers of history, the Dissenters have retrograded, however they may have advanced in the science of politics. Neal and Palmer, and Bogue and Bennet, the historians of Dissent, were quite free from the charge of candour and honesty; but Dr. Price excels all his predecessors. The deteriorating influence of politics is evident in the writings of the Dissenters of the present day, when contrasted with those of their predecessors; for, bad as are those of the latter, those of the former, if possible, are infinitely worse. The perusal of this volume has reminded us of the remark of Coleridge:-" I have known very few Dissenters indeed, whose hatred to the Church of England was not a much more active principle of action with them than their love of Christianity."*

In the close of our former Article we intimated that we should accompany the author over the wide field which he had marked out, and we now hasten to perform the promise which we then made. But before we enter upon the body of the work, we must detain our readers for a brief space while we consider certain extraordinary statements which arrested our attention in the Preface:

-

"The present work owes its origin to a course of lectures which the author delivered to the congregation meeting in Devonshire-square, London."

The substance of the two volumes, therefore, was delivered in lectures to the author's congregation. Now we cannot refrain from asking, are these the subjects for a minister to bring before his people? Is this the way to preach "Jesus Christ and him crucified?" Is this the author's method of conveying Christian instruction? Is it not preaching Dissent rather than the Gospel? We ask, do any of the clergy of the Church of England degrade the pulpit to the level of a common lecture-room, and amuse their hearers with discourses on Nonconformity and the points at issue between Churchmen and Dissenters, instead of labouring to advance them in the way to heaven? Our author could

Coleridge's Table Talk, vol. ii. 20.

not, in the delivery of these lectures, have consulted the edification of his flock, for the volumes abound in railing accusations against his brethren of the Church of England; on the contrary, he must have been under the influence of those political principles which, in the case of the vast majority of Dissenters, are eating out the very vitals of Christianity from their hearts.

As a reason for writing the history of Nonconformity, we are told that it " is so blended with the progress of civil freedom, as to render an intimate knowledge of the latter essential to an accurate estimate and due appreciation of the former." Preface, p. 6. It is constantly asserted by Dissenters, that we owe our civil and religious privileges to the views and exertions, first of the Puritans, and subsequently of the Nonconformists. It is, however, an undisputed fact that the Puritans, who took up arms against Charles I., fought, not for the principles of religious liberty, but that they might impose their own system of churchgovernment on the whole country. The views of the members of the Church of England were, at all events, as enlightened as those of their opponents. The former were the first advocates of religious toleration, and the first to apply the principle, which was done at the Revolution in 1688. The Revolution, indeed, furnishes the most irrefragible argument against the position, that Nonconformity nurtured the principles of liberty; for it is certain that the Revolution was effected by Churchmen; and it is equally certain that the Dissenters of that day, almost to a man, sided with the infatuated James II., who had wheedled them into submission by his treacherous Declaration of Indulgence. Popery and arbitrary power were then impending the country, and by whom was the danger averted? By Churchmen! The Dissenters were worse than passive, for they sanctioned, some by actual addresses, and all by their refusal to oppose the measures of the Court, the designs of the monarch, whose sole aim was to re-establish Popery and trample upon the liberties of his people. Did the Dissenters oppose Popery? No! they remained silent! It is a fact which ought ever to be mentioned to the praise of the English Church-a fact, too, of which Churchmen may well be proud, of which, especially in these days of spurious liberalism, they may be permitted to boast-that during the short reign of the second James, embracing a period of little more than four years, nearly three hundred separate works against Popery, and in defence of civil and religious liberty, were written and published by clergymen, while only three solitary treatises proceeded, during the same period, from the pens of Nonconformists. Let Dr. Price ponder this circumstance, and he will scarcely venture to hazard an observa

tion, so obviously destitute of all foundation in truth, as that to which we have now directed the attention of our readers.*

One of the most remarkable features of this volume, like the preceding, is the author's bitter hostility to an established church. His indignation boils over in almost every chapter. One of the choicest morsels on this favourite topic is contained in the Preface, where it stands, we suppose, as an intimation of the kind of entertainment which the reader who accompanies the author through the volume may reasonably expect. We extract the following:

"The further he has looked into history, the deeper has become his conviction that the alliance at present subsisting between the Church and the State is part of the grand apostacy-an unnatural and most pernicious association, which must be terminated before the ultimate triumphs of the Christian faith are achieved. The essential spirit of Popery has been retained under a Protestant name, and the consequence has been, distraction to the State, and formality and worldlymindedness to the Church. The author does not wish to be regarded as neutral on this cardinal point; his opinions have been maturely formed; they are the growth of years, have gathered strength with the increase of his knowledge, and are destined, in his judgmentslowly it may be, but still effectually to remodel the institutions of society." Preface, p. iii.†

Several catalogues of the works against Popery were published about the time of the Revolution. Three are now lying before usone from the pen of Dr. Claggest another by Wake, subsequently Archbishop of Canterbury, and a third by Peck. They bear the dates 1687, 1688, and 1689, and contain a list and description of all the works published against Popery during the reign of James II. and the last few years of that of Charles II. The number of works, and most of them of considerable size too, published by members of the Church of England, was, as has been stated already, nearly three hundred! There treatises only were written by Dissenters during the same period. One of the writers, in closing his list, says, "I need not here to beg our Nonconformist brethren's pardon for this slender account of their writings against Popery during the reign of King James the Second, because I have used great diligence to attain an exact account of them. However, if there be any discourses written by them, but omitted in this catalogue, or if any of those in the catalogue whose authors' names I could not recover do belong to them; if either the authors, or any friends for them, will be pleased to send the titles of the books, with the author's name, to Mr. R. Baldwin, the publisher of this catalogue, they shall be inserted in the next edition of this catalogue, if it have

one."

The Puritans are censured by this author for their attachment to a religious establishment. He tells us that had they taken another step,