opinion is, and the more painful to me that acquaintance with you may proove, and the more effectually advantageous the benefit of your prayers, which I heartily beg that you will now aford mee. And the entrance on the former of these will be most obligingly made by your admonishing mee of anything wherein, on your survey of anything of mine, you have wisht mee admonisht, and by directing me the way wherein I may at any time performe that which may be in the lest degree gratefull or usefull to you. I have, I thanke God, of late recover'd to a full health again, if God see it fit to continue it (so pretious a talent) to so unworthy a possessor of it, and enjoy as cheerfull a recesse, by the favour of the good Lady, heer, as I ever at any time tasted, or was ambitious of; and your expressions of kindness to me make me with reason believe, that you will not be ill pleased that I tell you so. I shall no longer detein you then whilst I render you my hearty acknowledgments of this your very much valued favour, and beseech the continuance of your charity, to cover the many faults of your very affectionate friend and servant,

Jan. 13.

H. HAMMOND.

I must not omit to add my true reverence to the memory of that excellent divine, the BP of Corke, whom God fatherly removed. from the evills then more than impendent on these nations. Meethinks it is not unreasonable for me to enquire whither there be not some body of orthodox divinity, or decision of some important questions in it, left behind him, for sober posterity to profit by.

For my worthy friend Mr. Benet, G. H.

SACRED POETRY.

MEMORY.

TEN years have roll'd their solemn course away
Since thou, my son, wast number'd with the dead.
Life's sap just wither'd in thy flowring May,
And blighted ere thy eighteenth spring had fled.

Ah! I remember well that painful day,

When the keen knife (the while my heart's core bled)
Sever'd the branch to save the fragile tree;

Without a murmur or a tear from thee.

Month followed month, and year succeeded year;
I could not bring my lips to name thy name;
At thought of thee there fell the unconscious tear;
I humbly bowed, but sorrow had its claim.
So good, so quick, so wise, what hopes appear
Of manhood ripening to a virtuous fame:
Beloved and loving-yet all could not save,
Those hopes were buried in the silent grave.

682

CORRESPONDENCE.

The Editor begs to remind his readers that he is not responsible for the opinions
of his Correspondents.

NEW MARRIAGE LAW.

DEAR SIR,-Your correspondent "D." and others, may be interested in a fact connected with the above odious subject, which deserves to be made widely known among the clergy, as an encouraging evidence of the depth and sincerity of religious feeling which has root in individuals (and no doubt very many, throughout the kingdom) of a most valuable class namely, quiet and unpretending laymen of the middle ranks. It does not throw any direct light on "D.'s" question, (No. lix. p. 620,) yet it may help to shew the probability that such a distaste as he speaks of will be displayed very generally. I offer you the extract which follows, to be inserted or not, at your discretion, from an entire conviction, grounded on full personal knowledge of the parties concerned, that their objections to the new marriage law are strictly of the right kind;-in each case individual and independent; as far removed as possible from any over-heated notions of religion; proceeding from conspicuously good and loyal subjects; and, in a word, precisely such as it should most gratify all anxious clergymen to see advanced. The extract is from a remonstrance of three of the guardians of the Oundle Union to his Majesty's Poor Law Commissioners, and will sufficiently make good its own story, though I can only give it you in a very disjointed shape, for fear "it, should, not, be, put, in," to your stores, by reason of any too Alexandrine aspect of this note.

Mr Secretary Chadwick (the very beau ideal of an official officious gentleman) had been pleased to have recourse to a "supposition of latent considerations," to account for the unwillingness of the board in question to entertain the registrar general's first mandate. The three remonstrants thus reply:-" They must contend that the foregoing allusion to latent considerations' is at once unjustified and unjustifiable, when the nature of the new laws respecting marriage and registration is considered. To instance only in the former-this new statute, professedly addressed to the relief of scrupulous consciences, goes to impose upon the undersigned, as guardians, the irksome necessity of being instrumental in administering (pro tanto) provisions which are altogether repugnant to their own sincere feelings of duty; forcing them, in one respect, to invade (as they think) what has hitherto been the province of the church; and in another, and much worse, in some sort to sanction usages directly subversive of some of the best religious feelings of the community (as in chap. 85, sec. 21). They beg to say, respectfully but unequivocally, that they neither can, nor will, take any ministerial part, however humble, in the execution of such a statute." "As regards themselves, they feel the burthen sought

to be imposed upon them to be an unprovoked offence to their own conscience; and even should the consequence be fine and imprisonment,' (implied threatenings of which they must regard as weak arguments,) their fixed determination is, to take no share, at any time, in that part of the newly-interpreted office of guardians.'

The board has subsequently been constrained to act obediently to the triumvirate; but the individual remonstrants adhere, and will adhere, to their determination. For the present, however, the only point which immediately concerns the readers of the "British Magazine" in this business, is that which I have stated in the outset. If we, the clergy, do not feel obliged to laymen who will stand up thus sincerely and generously in such a cause, we are either not so thoughtful, or not so grateful, as we ought to be.

I am, dear Sir, yours truly,

X.

ON CLERICAL MEETINGS.

SIR,-In your number for April last appeared a brief statement of the mode in which clerical and prayer meetings are usually conducted in your correspondent" Cereticus"" own neighbourhood; and one might have expected that, from the modesty with which it is put forth, and the total absence of pretension with which his concluding queries are proposed, (leading the unbiassed reader almost to imagine that they are asked with a view of eliciting information, rather than of conveying censure,) he would have received, even from one who differed entirely from him, as to the regularity, and consequently the utility, of those meetings, a reply in that spirit of courtesy which is every man's due, who has done nothing to forfeit the character of a gentleman and a Christian. It appears to me, however, that such is not the spirit with which "Dyfedensis," in your October number, meets "Cereticus'" statement; and, though no unconcerned spectator of the contest, it is for the purpose of entering my protest against the feeling by which the former appears to have been actuated, rather than of discussing the merits of clerical meetings, that I take the liberty of troubling you with the following remarks.

It is much to be regretted that "Dyfedensis," as he is dissatisfied with "Cereticus'" description of the "general routine" of clerical meetings, did not meet it with a counter-statement; and if the complaints implied in his questions, as to the regularity, and even legality, of their proceedings, be not founded on truth, that he did not attempt to disprove them in that superior spirit of gentleness and forbearance which might be expected from one who has had the advantage of attending nearly 300 of those meetings. But I fear that works of supererogation have a tendency quite the reverse of those of charity, which is said to be "not puffed up;" for "Dyfedensis," upon the strength of his single experience, has volunteered an assertion which nothing but a thorough conviction of its veracity, founded upon

irrefragable testimony, could possibly justify him in using. He charges "Cereticus" with misstatement (wilful misstatement, we must understand it, as he uses no qualifying expression,) and false reasoning. Now a man's ideas upon any given subject may, from one cause or other, be so indistinct, and his judgment consequently so inaccurate, that one may, without personal offence, call in question the correctness of any conclusion he may arrive at, through the medium of such imperfect faculties. Each may, for instance, retain his own opinion as to the utility of clerical meetings. But with regard to matter of fact, as when "Dyfedensis" denies the truth of "Čereticus" " statement, the case is quite different. Here one charges the other with an offence against society, one of the connecting links of which is, that every man speak the truth unto his neighbour: here is an impeachment of "Cereticus'" veracity; here is a charge of moral delinquency preferred against him, and how is it sought to be substantiated? "Cereticus" has, a priori, as great a right to be believed as "Dyfedensis." He can have no possible advantage in misstating facts. His language is quite as temperate as "Dyfedensis"." It betrays no lurking animosity against those of the clergy who uphold clerical meetings. What has "Dyfedensis" to allege in support of his charge? How will he make it appear that he is to be credited in preference to "Cereticus"? He may possibly say, that the onus probandi rests with "Cereticus," that he is only rebutting a charge already made. In this there may be some semblance of reason; and had he contented himself with calling for proofs, before he took upon him to pass sentence, and decide, ex cathedrâ, that the statement is false, little could have been said against him. To a prudent suspension of judgment, till proof were brought and opportunity given of examining into the value of it, "Cereticus" could not have objected. But when Dyfedensis" goes further than this, the onus changes sides, and it becomes him to shew what reason there is, antecedently of all proof, either one way or the other, to believe him rather than "Cereticus." Had he condescended to state how clerical meetings are conducted; had he told us at what time, for what purpose, and by whom they were first instituted; what rules were laid down for their conduct; had he vouched for the uniform observance of those rules over the whole diocese; or, if any deviations from the original ones have occurred, whether they were sanctioned by authority or not; had he entered into an explanatory detail of these matters, we should then have had one statement, affirmed to be true, to contrast with the other, denounced as false. We should have been enabled to form some notion of the general state of the case; we might have taken notes to assist us in summing up; and then, with the placid dignity so becoming us in our high judicial situation, have waited for "Cereticus' " proofs. But does "Dyfedensis" bring nothing forward to sustain this grave charge against "Cereticus?" Yes; he gives us his own individual testimony, which we are, of course, bound to accept as equivalent to a perfect demonstration: "I," the single individual 1, "Dyfedensis," in all my experience, "never, no, not once, met with an