Page images


(From the Newcastle Journal.)


Vacant.--Election in March. Haydon Bridge is about nine miles above Hexham, in the parish of Warden, but has a chapel of its own, and constitutes a distinct chapelry. “ John Shaftoe, of Netherwarden, in the county of Northumberland, clerk,” selected for an institution, which he wisely and benevolently designed, " to the honour and glory of Almighty God, in the education and instruction of youth in the knowledge of his Word; and for and towards the maintenance of poor distressed Protestant families; and for the putting out to apprentice poor chil. dren.” For this purpose, by a deed dated the 17th June, 1685, he conveyed property on trust to purchase land in Haydon Bridge, and build thereon a house for a free grammar school, and dwelling-house for the master ; and to elect and choose, by the advice and examination of some rercrend divines, an able scholar, being an University scholar, of the degree of Master of Arts, and of good life and conversation, approved of by the bishop or archdeacon of the diocese, and one usher, to be approved of by the minister of the parish of Warden, who should teach and instruct any number of boys, girls, and young men, born within the chapelry of Haydon, or at Woodshiels, in the chapelry of Newbrough. The deed does not specify what shall be taught, but seems to leave that to the trustees for the time being; but it afterwards provides that the head master should not take above one penny a quarter for teaching and instructing the children of the favoured districts of Haydon and Woodshiels in the Latin and Greek tongues. In the year 1785, the rents of the estate having increased from 801. to about 3201. a year, the then trustees applied to Parliament to regulate the charity, and in particular to enable them to increase the usher's salary, and to maintain an additional usher and a schoolmistress, and to build alms-houses. Accordingly, an act was obtained. Mark how the pious intention of the founder-that his institution should be to the honour of Almighty God, in the instruction of youth in the knowledge of His Word; how his respect and confidence in the ministers of His Church-that the master should be chosen by the advice and examination of reverend divines, and approved of by the Bishop and Archdeacon of the Diocese,-are regulated by the act of Parliament!

“ Be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for the said trustees, or the major part of them, to elect and appoint such master, and such and so many person or persons to be usher or ushers, to teach and instruct,&c. &c.

In 1819, the revenue having increased from 3201. to near 9001. clear, another act was obtained, which provides that the Head Master should be in priest's orders, and should, every alternate Sunday on which divine service was not performed in the chapel at Haydon, by the Vicar of Warden, perform the morning and evening church service, and on the other Sundays the evening service ; and also that he should have for teaching, or taking care of the said school,” (an odd expression), such annual stipend or salary, not exceeding one-third of the clear annual revenue for the time being, nor less than 2501., provided the same did not exceed such one-third as the trustees should think proper, besides the use and occupation of the dwelling-house and conveniences attached thereto.

It is now his duty, by himself and the ushers, to teach gratuitously such boys, resident in the chapelry of Haydon and at Woodshiels, as present the selves; but this affords very slight employment to the Head Master, and he has only in addition to perform the divine service mentioned above; thus a large portion of his time is unoccupied by any official duty. His emolument consists of a money stipend of at least 250l. a year, and a large and excellent

dwelling-house, with a garden and suitable offices, affording accommodation for several boarders. Considering the situation, the slight duty, and the extent of the emolument, we do not hesitate to assert that here is an endowment sufficient for a scholastic establishment unequalled in these northern parts. And we doubt not were the vacancy fairly notified in the Universities, and the candidates assured that talents and attainments would only be defeated by superior qualifications, that "an able scholar,” a man of piety and sound learning, and a good preacher withal, might be found who would fully accomplish the intention of this munificent grant, and the wishes of the trustees, to whose “ honour and conscience” it is entrusted. It would indeed be a heavy accusation, a grievous offence, by which the country might hereafter be deprived of many liberal donations towards the religious education of the people, did it appear that, through mere negligence, men who know well how to administer property for their own and their children's welfare, had entirely defeated a most sacred trust, and thrown away advantages and opportunities which cannot be computed in the language of a rent-toll

. But though time has been lost, when we look upon the names in the following list, we do not yet despair. At all events let the trustees be assured that the eyes of their neighbours, of all who respect and value the patriotism and piety of John Shafto

are upon them; let them know that this, at least, is required of them, that they exercise in this matter as much care and circumspection as they use in the selection of a tenant for the meanest of their freeholds. The names of the present trustees are WILLIAM ORD, Esq., Whitfield House ; STAMP BROOKSBANK, Esq., Hermitage; ROBERT L. ALLGOOD, Esq., Nunwick; Rev. Henry Wago TELL, Newbrough; John Ridley, Esq., Parkend ; John Kirsopp, Esq., Hexham; and ROBERT PEARSON, Esq., Newcastle-upon-Tyne.*


IMPROVED VERSION. It is often said that one half of the world does not know how the other lives; and it seems very clear that one half of the world knows not at all what the other is busy about. Think of all the pains which the late Mr. Belsham, on one side, took with the Unitarian Improved Version, and all the pains taken by the late Mr. Rennell

, and many eminent living divines, to contund the said version on the other. And now the learned Vice-Chancellor, it seems, never before heard of this version, and does not know who made it, (alas ! Mr. Belsham,) and could not till he saw it have believed that such a' wretched performance could have been in existence. (Alas! poor contunders of the said version!)

Still, on the present occasion, one must rejoice at his Honour's previous non-acquaintance with these matters. He comes quite unprejudiced at least, and, being fond of scholarship, and a sound scholar, is exactly the person one

This is a pleasing specimen of the blessed fruits which may be expected from Parliaments dealing with charitable bequests. Mr. Shaftoe directs that a master shall be EXAMINED by proper persons before he is elected. The Act says it shall be a mere matter of vote among a set of trustees. But examining a master before you chuse him, one may suppose, is the old bigoted way of proceeding, and the march of intellect directs men to take these things out of the bands of the bigoted clergy and enables the Northumberland gentry to elect without any examination at all. And why should a bishop forsooth be consulted, a bigot of course? It may be added that this way of treating " a parson” who leaves 9001. per annum for education, is highly encouraging to other parsons and persons to follow his example.

+ Published by Mr. Fraser, with the Vice-Chancellor's leave, and well worth buying, and reading.

VOL. V.-Feb. 1834.

[ocr errors]

would wish as an arbitrator. It has often been said on our side, that we wished nothing more than this. Take a man, if such could be found, who knew neither system, but knew Greek, and give him the New Testament. Without saying what the hidden and esoteric meaning is, if that person did not say that the plain meaning of the words in every page, construed as any other book would be construed, was to declare that our Lord was God, the Trinitarians, in a body, might contract to go over to Socinians. And here on a particular point, to a great degree, we have what we wish. His Honour tells us what he thinks, as a scholar, of the Improved Version. He has done himself and his scholarship high credit, and the Improved Version full justice. Hear him:

“I have taken this as a specimen of the whole,— I have looked at a variety of passages, and I do not remember to have seen any translation which could be considered more unsatisfactory-more arbitrarymore fancifulmore foolish— and, I am sorry to say, more false, than this thing, called by the Unitarians an Improved Version.”—(p. 15.)

What is, perhaps, even more important is what follows :

“The gentlemen, who had translated the Unitarian Testament, had made it plain on the face of it, that they meant to establish a doctrine that our Saviour was not begotten in that sense" (the sense affixed by the church of England and orthodox dissenters to the term]. That they meant to oppose, and, for the purpose of avoiding the inference which might be made in the mind of an unlearned reader, they wilfully altered the word, and substituted a creed instead of a translation.”—(p. 13.) Again, having given the Greek text in Heb. i.- "Os av årávyaoua, &c., he says, “And what was the pretended accurate translation of these words?—Who being a ray of his brightness, and an image of his perfections,'— xapartip rñs útoothoews avrov--an image of his perfections!!! I was perfectly astonished, and could hardly have conceived it possible before I had read it, that any person could have ventured to call this an improved version of the Scriptures, which has rendered the word 'TOOTAOIS 'perfections.' It was perfectly plain in that passage, the parties never meant to give a translation, but that they meant to fetter the understanding of the reader by imposing their creed in the shape of a translation.”—(p. 15.) What would be said of the horrible church of England if her translators had altered any passages which they chose, in order to fetter the understanding of the reader, and impose her creed instead of a translation? Imposing a creed is called dreadful tyranny. What are we to say of those who call it so, and yet impose one under the name of a translation—inventing a system, and then translating passages arbitrarily so as to countenance that system? What are we to say of a system which requires such proceedings, and cannot stand if the New Testament be construed on the same principle as any other book ? What would have been said if any clergyman had spoken of this version as the Vice-Chancellor has done? No name would have been too bad for him. The Vice-Chancellor's testimony, coming from a Judge, and a real scholar, is quite invaluable.


(From the Record.) It is, however, only of late that we have been made acquainted with the fact, that this melancholy and deplorable union is carried, if possible, still further among the London dissenting ministers, and that they are indiscriminately appointed to ecclesiastical duties in some of the chapels in the metropolis. A particular instance has been pointed to us of a very aggravated description, in the case of the chapel of the City-Road Orphan Working School. We have the following printed list now before us :-






" List of the ministers who have engaged to preach the Lord's-day Evening
Lectures, at the Orphan Working School, in the City Road, for the year 1833.
Service to commence at half-past six o'clock precisely.
May......... 12 Rev. Dr. Winter

July 28 S. Wood.
Pye Smith.

Francis Moore. 26 B. Marden.

W. Young. June.......... 2 R. Aspland.

18 George Kenrick. 9 T. Russell.

25 Joseph Ivimoy. 16 ...... James Upton. Sept.......... 1 D. Davison. 23 John Yockney. 30 E. Chapman.

15 July......... 7 J. B. Shenstone.

James Yates. 14 George Clayton,

29 G. Pritchard." 21 Dr. Humphrys. In this list our readers will probably recognise several Socinian names, but those of Mr. Aspland and Mr. Yates are sufficient to mark the character of this union. Mr. Aspland and Mr. Fox are, probably, the two most prominent Socinians in this country, and are always to be found among the most eager assailants of the deity of Jesus Christ. But this is not all. Let us remember to whom these ministers are to preach. Upon whom is the poison of false doctrine to be distilled ? Is it to the orphan children of a public charity that Mr. Aspland is to proclaim that Jesus Christ was only a man; that the doctrine of the Atonement is absurd, and the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit mystical folly? And are orthodox ministers, men professing godliness, and professing to deplore the corruptions in the Church of England—are they to stand by unconcerned and allow their names to appear as acting in concert with the propounders of heresy, and thus to lend their influence, so far as it may reach, to undo perhaps the pious instructions of the departed parents of these children, and lead them away for ever from the paths of truth j*

FROM MR. O'CONNELL'S LETTER. "I wish the people of England would understand this ; and, above all, that the protestants of Ireland would reflect on the answer to this question—who is Mr. Vigors? He is a protestant gentleman-a sincere protestant, returned to parliament by a catholic constituency-aided and encouraged by the catholic clergy, though opposed by a catholic candidatema most respectable and highly influential member of that body, the very Rev. Dr. Fitzgerald having proposed Mr. Vigors at the hustings; and there is not one single member of the House of Commons more sincerely respected by his constituents.”—Pilot.

The following paragraph is taken from the Christian Advocaten

“When touching upon reforms in our Universities, there appears to us to be one very obvious one, which has been hitherto very little, if at all, adverted to. That reform is, that a large proportion, at least, of the revenues of the different colleges should be dedicated to the purposes of education, instead of being expended, as is now the case, in maintaining so many persons in a luxurious idleness, which very much unfits them for future active commerce with the world. Why should not the fellows of colleges be all tutors, and the different under-graduates divided among them? And why should so much be paid by

There has beeu a good deal more said on this matter, and other instances of the same kind alleged and not denied. --Ev.

parents in the shape of rent and tutorage, when the one has been obviated and the other supplied by the bounty of the several founders ?"-Herald.

Can this be from the Morning Herald ? That is, can any daily London paper in great circulation be conducted by persons so grossly ignorant of facts ?

First, as to the great wealth spent in luxurious idleness. The fellowships at the two greatest colleges in Cambridge vary from a little above one hundred to about two hundred a year. Luxury indeed! And these are open to all men on strict and fair examination, to the cobbler's son as well as the squire's or the peer's !

What the meaning even of the last sentence is, it is hard to divine. Does the honourable public think, when men have worked hard and earned a small competence, and with that mean to make their way in the world for a few years, or pursue their studies in college, that they, because they have the monstrous allowance of 1501. per annum, are to educate the children of the honourable public for nothing? And next, as to the dreadful expenses of tutorage. How much does the reader conceive is paid to the tutor? One hundred and fifty pounds per annum? Or one hundred? or fifty? No; but ten pounds. And out of this, paid by each of his pupils, he finds two assistant tutors. To take one example only, at Trinity College, Cambridge, at this moment, a young man has the advantage of such men as Mr. Whewell, Mr. Thirlwall, and Mr. Perry, in succession, for ten pounds a year! What would these wretched brawlers for reform have? If men are poor, and obliged to go as sizars, they pay not ten pounds, but five. And then they have allow. ances which cover a large portion of their expenses. Of all things, the most disgusting is, to see one utterly and hopelessly ignorant person dogmatizing on matters of which he knows nothing, and another retailing his nonsense.

COMPARATIVE NUMBERS OF CHURCHMEN AND DISSENTERS. It is quite impossible to go into this subject at length. But it is necessary to recall to the reader's mind that, as the tales about church property have been put down, and the advocates of dissent can no longer make much use of that falsehood, their favourite weapon now is, their immense number. This is as bold and unblushing a falsehood as the other, but it is one by which they think themselves more likely to profit; because, first, authentic documents are not so easy to be got ; because it will not answer any purpose of government to make an authoritative declaration on the point; and thirdly, because one party of the dissenters at least means to try to bully the government. To shew that members of Parliament hear or propagate these falsehoods, just as they did formerly those about the nine or ten millions of church property, it may be mentioned that two of these honourable gentlemen, at a dinner at Kirkaldy, allowed the most wild, false, and extravagant assertions of the great superiority in the number of dissenters over churchmen to pass without a comment. The Standard, a paper to which the church owes more than it can easily repay, (and it is not one of the faults of the church to be particularly grateful to its advocates.) has been handling this subject from day to day. It is only to be lamented that nothing more can be done here than giving a few statements, warning clergy and churchmen that they are bound to inform themselves accurately on this subject, and be prepared to circulate exposures of this falsehood,

“ The Morning Chronicle"-says the Cambridge Chronicle (another paper which has always a very superior leading article)—“in one of those blustering and sweeping assertions which now are expected to stand in the place of argument-declared, a few days ago, that in the manufacturing districts the dissenters out-number the members of the Church of England in the proportion of three, or even four, to one. The Standard at once met this assertion by an appeal to documents furnished by the dissenters themselves in the month of July, 1830, when a return was made to

« PreviousContinue »