the said parties dwell." Now this regulation, to say nothing of the professional indelicacy of meddling with another man's duties, is really of great practical use and necessity as regards society, for preventing clandestine marriages; and yet, even in small village populations, where the officiating minister can so easily inquire into the circumstances, and may be supposed to know, ought to know full well, those who belong to his own flock, from such as climb over the sheep-fold, how often is this neglected, the bans being put up, and the marriage solemnized, and "no questions asked!" It is really a true observation that one of your correspondents lately made, that "the clergy are not to be trusted with their own government." I share, I confess, in the jealousy very generally entertained among the clergy, of state interference, to the extent it is carried now-a-days by acts of parliament, and non-ecclesiastical commissions; at the same time, we do furnish a pretext, possibly create a necessity, for such interference, so long as we set at defiance our own ecclesiastical laws already existing. And, as an inducement to greater attention to the canons generally, it would perhaps be expedient to cancel such of them as have unavoidably fallen into desuetude from a change of institutions and manners, upon the same principle that it has been thought desirable by some of the best friends of our universities (I do not allude to such men as Lord Radnor, who does not come under this description) to revise their statutes. It is all very well to talk of the animus imponentis, as all we have to satisfy; but the obligation of an oath, or solemn declaration, ought not to rest, if it can be helped, upon any nice distinctions of casuistry; in swearing, of all things, our conversation should be yea, yea, and nay, nay; a certain carelessness is superinduced, which imperceptibly weakens (not in conscience, but in practice,) the whole obligation, if it is understood to be intended only in part; I cannot account in any other way for the utter neglect of canons evinced by some whom I know to be conscientious and excellent men. But if this be the true solution, it will ever be the case, so long as we have canons containing, as some of them do, injunctions which cannot now be obeyed. I say then, let us have a convocation, or synod, or (bonâ fide ecclesiastical) commission, to review both canons and rubrics, retaining such as are expedient and practicable, and expunging the rest. And in the meantime, let both "bishops and curates," who may have hitherto not done full justice to their good intentions, adhere more rigidly, in practice, to such of them as are within their reach,—that we may thereby remove the reproach of not being worthy to be trusted with our own legislation and government, from that laxity and apathy which appear to me, of all the difficulties so learnedly started in the way of a revival of convocation, about the greatest, and our scrupulous avoidance of which would probably secure to us such increased confidence and respect as would, after a while, procure the removal of legal difficulties, if such there be. I submit to "S. P." whether this be not a more profitable train of inquiry than his attempted recurrence to canons, popularly obnoxious ones too, passed by our church indeed, but anterior to her reformation? Your faithful servant,

Stifford Rectory, July 7.

WM. PALIN.

CLERICAL ATTENDANCE AT BALLS.

SIR-The remarks in your last number on the subject of Clerical Attendance at Balls have induced me to trouble you with a few observations. Upon the letter of " Clericus Felix" I will only observe, that "unto the pure, all things are pure;" and that into whatever society a man goes, he may possibly get some good from it, in the way of self-government at least; and perhaps also he may be able, in quarters the most unpromising, to speak a word in season which may be the seed of eternal good. A question, however, still remainsWhether this possibility is sufficiently great to warrant a clergyman's entering every society, and whether it might not be better for him to keep himself from some.

"Alpha's" letter is entitled to much respect, as it goes upon the golden rule of abridging oneself of one's own liberty for fear of injuring the conscience of a weak brother. If we thought more of this principle in all our actions we should seldom be in doubt as to the right course to pursue in matters which are styled indifferent; for we should adopt a rule of conduct for ourselves which would necessarily increase our own respectability, while its adoption would not imply at all that we considered others to be wrong who acted differently from ourselves in these particulars.

With the remarks of "F. O." I entirely agree, and I wish he had carried them out a little further. For myself, I have not time to discuss the question at length; but I am anxious to observe, that the clergy seem to be in a very false position as regards their intercourse with society, as it is called, and that this circumstance is constantly putting them upon the attempt to reconcile with their clerical pursuits some questionable practices of the world. Field sports, for instance, and the general round of visiting which is to be met with in most of our neighbourhoods and towns, including the gaieties of the ball-room and race-course, are entered into, I may say, almost upon principle, by a large portion of the clergy, especially by those who are opposed to that party which systematically classes these among forbidden things. Such adoption of the world's practices may be at least, in a great number of instances, the result of a laudable conscientiousness about being always in the way of doing good to all men, and of an anxiety to divest religion of the austerity and gloominess which some persons suppose to belong to her.

But is it quite clear that this amiable kind of intermixture with the world is altogether justifiable? Do not the clergy who act in this Inanner, from perhaps too anxious a wish to be on good terms with men, run the risk of neglecting weightier matters ? Do they not, from a desire, as they think, of pleasing "all men unto edification," sometimes go far to impair their own delicate perception of right? And if so, do they not, instead of raising the standard of the world around them, sink themselves rather to a level with the low criterion which satisfies the world? I am afraid that this has been too much the

result of this ad libitum intercommunion. Now if, as "A. C." remarks, at the close of "F. O.'s" letter, "one of the most common and powerful arguments is, that the clergy ought to set an example," notwithstanding" a young lady" now and then may observe, that "it is an example which nobody is to follow," it is clear that the general opinion of the world is, that the practice of the clergy ought to be as exemplary as possible, even though the laity may think that they are not concerned to follow such good practice themselves. However this may be, the prevalence and weight of the opinion prove at least that the laity attaches a greater degree of respect to a clergy man who endeavours to act up to the highest standard; and this again proves that the moral effect produced by such a clerical character is enhanced, the higher the standard to which he raises himself.

The safer plan, then, and therefore, according to Bishop Butler, the only plan, inasmuch as that which has the highest probability of being right is worthiest of being followed by a wise man, would be for "Clerical Attendance at Balls" to be entirely discontinued, as well as every other amusement of the kind before alluded to. Indeed, it seems hardly possible for any one who has an awful fear of God be. fore his eyes, whose daily course of life ought to be one of abstinence, self-denial, and mortification, seeing that he has not only renounced the devil and all his works, the pomps and vanities of the sinful world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh, but is further pledged by his ordination vows to the holy and laborious task of preaching the gos pel, to be too tremblingly alive to his condition. Such an one, it seems, ought to have no indifferent actions; but his whole course of life, including the things which apparently might be done with the most perfect innocence, should be altogether "of faith," all having reference to one object-the glory of God.

There can be no doubt, indeed, that "the clergy ought to set an example;" but is it not quite as right for the laity to do the same? St. Paul's argument in Rom. xv. seems to apply exactly as well to the case of the laity as of the clergy; if so, whatever actions are censurable in the one are censurable in the other. The laity should con. sider, then, whether one and the same high course of Christian principle, embracing every thought, every impulse, every word and deed, be not incumbent upon all alike "that name the name of Christ,"whether whatever is right upon Christian grounds for one set of men to do or to leave undone be not right for another set, cæteris paribus; whether, therefore, the tendency of various pursuits and amusements which are now sanctioned by society be a subject interesting to the clergy alone, or not rather to the whole thinking community.

I. C.

[It is hoped that other readers understood the lady's meaning better than the writer of this letter, who seems by the subsequent part of it quite to agree with her in the view which she so briefly and pithily expressed.-ED.]

EXTRACT FROM NELSON'S LIFE OF BISHOP BULL.

SIR,-I should feel greatly obliged if you could insert the following extract from Nelson's Life of Bishop Bull, ed. 1714, p. 364 :

"It must be owned, that Dr. Bull was indeed a very frank asserter of some primitive truths upon which are built several errors of the church of Rome, and the sermons which are now printed will furnish the reader with several instances of this remark. Now among those who cannot or will not distinguish the foundation from the hay and stubble that is built upon it, we must not wonder if he was thought too much inclining to the church of Rome; which unjust censure was confirmed by his exact conformity to the rules of the church of England in a place where the people were under great prejudices, both against her discipline and liturgy. But this calumny hath been thrown upon the greatest lights of our church, and upon one of the best men that ever swayed the sceptre of Great Britain, and will be the fate of many more who shall zealously contend for the primitive doctrines and discipline of Christianity; and, surely, if that excellent prince, King Charles the First, and that primitive prelate, Archbishop Laud, could not escape the load of such malicious imputations, it is not to be wondered if others, who pursue their steps and tread in their paths of religion, though they move in a much inferior sphere, meet with the same obloquy and reproach which they so severely felt. But yet, in the day of any trial, the men of this character will be found the best defenders of the church of England, and the boldest champions against the corruptions of the church of Rome."

I have the honour to be, yours &c., E.

MR. ST. JOHN'S EDITION OF MILTON.

SIR,-Among the agents at work for the destruction of our most valued institutions in church and state, there is one who has not yet received from you that degree of attention to which his zeal and labours seem justly to entitle him.

About two years ago, a volume was ushered into the world, containing the select prose works of Milton, "being the first of a series of the noblest productions of English prose literature, presented to the public in the hope of inspiring a disposition to a renewed intercourse with the master spirits of our native land, and with a desire to rescue from the dust of ages the ablest efforts of the wise and the good." These, Sir, be brave words and plausible. And, certainly, to most of the critics of the day, whose judgment had been (I will not say disarmed, but) perhaps quickened and assisted by the present of a copy, the plan seemed major omni exceptione. A few, however, a very few, deeming "wise," and "good," and "the noblest efforts," to be relative terms, bearing very different meanings in the minds of Messrs.

Hone, Carlisle, and Jeremy Bentham, on the one hand, and of Granville Sharpe, or Coleridge, or Southey, on the other, deferred pronouncing definitive sentence. The issue has shewn how wisely.

The individual fixed upon to usher into the world these "noblest efforts of the wise and good" turns out (no doubt the publisher was ignorant of the fact) an ultra-radical in politics, and an ultra-liberal in religion. Kings, nobles, priests, are his abhorrence; and he seldom misses an opportunity of gibbeting them pro bono publico. Annual. parliaments, universal suffrage, vote by ballot, no property qualification for M.P.'s-these, "and such like deer, have been his food for many a year."

It will, therefore, scarcely astonish your readers, that "the noblest efforts of the wise and good," selected by this guide of public taste, this framer of the morals of "the rising generation," are precisely the sort of works which a judicious parent or tutor would be most careful to exclude from the view of his youthful charge. The chief treatises with which the public has been hitherto favoured are, the republican Milton's choice Essays on King-killing and Priest-cashiering, together with Sir Thomas More's most approved Method of constructing a Republic. To these have been appended what the editor doubtless esteems useful notes. What their use may be, and in what their chief merit consists, your readers may judge from the following specimens; and, first, of KINGS:

"Philosophers," says the preliminary discourse (after Cicero), p. xix. “are now employed in discovering how, in order to be happy, mankind may deliver themselves from their kings, which, after so many ages of useless toil and experiment, is the only hope they have left."

"The people, like a vast mass of brute matter, are fashioned by their tyrant (rupavvoc) into whatever form he pleases; he sends jugglers among them, under the name of priests, who fill their minds with dreams favourable to tyranny; by the instrumentality of these men, he darkens their minds, stupifies them with intellectual mandragora, and gradually plucks up by the root every free, and manly, and noble sentiment."-p. xxiv-v.

"Cicero's opinions were still more unfavourable to monarchy. He knew of no good that was likely to flow from a court upon the nation, but considered it a source of unmitigated evil; and the experience of mankind from that time to the present has done nothing to remove the grounds of this decision."—p. 21, see also p. 22.

"Sir Thomas More, we see, was no patron of legitimacy or divine right. He puts things on their proper footing-considering the prince removable when, from any cause whatever [!] he becomes incapable of performing his duties as the law requires."-p. 57.

NOBLES." The upper and privileged classes maintain their grandeur on oppression, and never care how great the sufferings of the people may be, provided their own incomes are not diminished."—p. 27.

"The conduct of the nobility contrasts strikingly with that of the middle orders of all times, by whom the poor and sick have been cared for and supported."—p. 28. And again,

"The race is unchanged; the houses of the great still supply the country with thieves and highwaymen, and the town with courtezans."

"All hereditary legislators naturally and necessarily oppose reform, knowing their own privileges to be the greatest of abuses, which to be complete, reform must sweep away. Hence the house of lords and its advocates are almost invariably opposed to everything that appears likely to benefit the nation at large."

PRIESTS. In p. 32, the author, speaking of the abbots of his day, says,