To what further extent concession may proceed, it is of course impossible for us to determine; it may be the final resolution of Englishmen that the panacea for the ills of Ireland will be to transfer it over bodily to Rome, and to the emissaries of the Papacy. All recent legislation has tended in this direction. Disaffection and despair have been once again engendered in Irish Protestants, and the whole weight of influence of authority and of Government favour have been assiduously thrown into the opposite scale. For the moment, there are apparently some symptoms of alarm at what may possibly be the result, and so there is a brief space and breathing time afforded for sober thought and reflection. So far Mr. Froude's volumes, although too late to arrest past evil, may furnish food for meditation to those who really are well-wishers to Ireland. We rejoice in being able to point to the wonderful change which has come over both the Irish Clergy and the Irish gentry during the present century. What was heretofore a minority, may now be fairly said to be a majority. Even absentee landlords have striven, not unsuccessfully, to remedy the evils caused by their residence out of the country. Honourable and devoted men have sprung up in these classes, who are an ornament, not only to Ireland, but to the empire. We could have wished that Mr. Froude's scheme had enabled him to embrace the story of this new birth among those who ought to be the leaders of every reform, social, moral, and religious. But although those who were formerly a scandal and a reproach, are now for the most part an honour and a praise, can this be said with any truth of those who are now trafficking in the distresses of Ireland? Is there a shadow of amelioration in the brawling patriots, in the venal scribes, in the frantic demagogues, in the bigoted priesthood, who are swaying the poor Celts, and perpetuating among them a hopeless state of anarchy? Corruption has descended to a lower level; the gentry have shaken their hands from holding bribes; but are there none administered, and are there none taken? Is life really more secure? Is the Irish Jury system anything but a farce? Is there a more kindly feeling towards England, and a less earnest craving for a separate national existence at all costs and hazards? Even if the Irish would be at rest, would Rome suffer them to be so? Of Lord Cornwallis Mr. Froude says:

"Correspondence shows disgust with the tone of public policy in Ireland, and indignation at the wretchedness of the people. He nowhere seems to have recognised the only measures which could elevate the one or relieve the other. He could think of nothing but the extension of political liberty. Had he looked below the surface, he would have seen that political liberty was the cause of the corruption which he abhorred; and that to lead the Irish people to

look to political reform as a cure for poverty and disorder was to teach them over again the fatal lesson which had plunged them into their existing misery." (iii. 472.)

What other lesson has been taught them during the last fifty years? Unless there is a pause in it, there will be Ireland for the Irish. When that consummation had come to pass, it will be matter of interest for those who witness it to watch what next the instinct of self-preservation will force upon England. Most sad it is, but righteous retribution for past neglect, past misgovernment, and ever present delusions, that there should still be antagonism between these two nations, and not heartfelt affection and complete identification of sympathy and interest. Meanwhile, towards the solution of the future problem, Mr. Froude's volumes are a most valuable contribution, for which every one who has the glory and happiness of our mighty Empire at heart will feel a debtor to him.

ON THE OPERATION OF THE CLERICAL RELIEF BILL.

IN the year 1870, Mr. Hibbert introduced a Bill into the House of Commons "for the Relief of persons admitted into the office of Priest or Deacon in the Church of England, and desiring to relinquish the same." In clerical circles generally the proposed measure was viewed with great disfavour, and there was a large amount of declamation on the subject of the indelibility of Orders. If Orders really are indelible, the action of Parliament could not efface them, nor blot out from the conscience the responsibilities so solemnly undertaken. We always, therefore, felt that those who upheld this exalted view were needlessly alarmed at the action of a measure which relieved from certain penalties and restrictions affecting civil life, but which could not discharge the conscience, nor alter the relation of the cleric to his Divine Master. To Him, as to his own master, he would eventually stand or fall for his action in this matter. Nor do we see that the scandal to the Church is so great if a man, already a wine merchant, for instance, executes a poll deed, and becomes one avowedly, instead of carrying on the business six days in the week, and ministering in the Church, if he sees fit, on the seventh? Ot the two, we prefer the former alternative. So we prefer the case of the gentleman now sitting in Parliament to that of John Horne Tooke. Previous to the passing of the Bill, our sympathy, if not our judgment, was rather with those who, in moving tones, and with most earnest pleading, dwelt with emphasis on the violence

done to tender consciences, and upon the hardship of retaining in unwilling bondage men who had, under mistaken impressions of a vocation, which they thought they had, and really had not, now repented of their imprudence, and sought relief from vows which neither their intellect nor their heart enabled them to fulfil. It was not impossible that there might be in the formularies of the Church difficulties which, to the inexperienced, might not seem formidable, but which, on more intimate acquaintance with them, would be found to be insuperable. It is true that a young man of three and twenty, who comes forward of his own free will, and, after professing that he has studied a subject, accepts office of a peculiarly solemn character, might be expected to adhere to it; but men's minds are so variously constituted that it might not be well to lay down too hard and fast a line, even in what seems so clear a case. With those who had undertaken solemn vows in the sight of God that they might be enabled to hold lucrative offices not tenable without such base compliance, our sympathy was most scant; nor would we have given a second thought for their relief. Richard Porson was not a model of morality, but to men of the class we allude to he is a standing rebuke, and, in comparison with them, an honour to our common humanity. Still, for aught that was apparent, nay, in so far as it was apparent, there might be a multitude of persons in bitter bondage, not the less bitter because unaccompanied with outward manacles, sighing for freedom in this free England of ours, and grinding in the mill, like Samson, with the eyes of their conscience blinded, ministering reluctantly a Word of God in which they hardly believed, and dispensing Sacraments, the efficacy of which they questioned. Even at the risk of serious defection from the ministry of the Church, it seemed well to open the doors of the prison-house, and let the oppressed go free. Most persons probably expected that there would be a considerable exodus; for, in a church like that of England, which numbers in her ranks highly educated men, thoroughly capable of earning distinction in any walk of life, and often commanding large private resources apart from professional emolument, many might probably, if only from the consciousness of their failure as clergymen, be tempted to seek another sphere. We did not, therefore, although anticipating some risk, protest against the measure, but rather welcomed it. Nay, we even hoped that some who are a notorious scandal would avail themselves of it, and relieve the Church from the incubus of their unhallowed presence among her ministers. In common however, we suspect, with most persons who speculated upon the measure, we have been surprised, and, in truth, somewhat disappointed, at its actual operation, so far as can be gathered from a tabular statement which has recently been

going the round of the public journals, wherein is furnished a list of those who, by executing deeds of relinquishment, and enrolling them in the Court of Chancery, have resigned their office of priest or deacon during the past four years. During that period only fifty persons, out of a body numbering more than sixteen thousand, have sought relief from the responsibilities of their sacred profession. It should be borne in mind also, that as this measure had been long in agitation, and as there had previously been no kind of relief, the accumulation might have been expected to be great; consequently that there would be at first, at any rate, a great burst so soon as ever the floodgates were set open. But when we proceed to analyse the return, this is by no means found to be the case. It was apparently with very hesitating steps, that even the most forward dipped their feet into the way so suddenly opened before them. During the latter portion of 1870, only sixteen persons out of all those who had been supposed to be longing for emancipation, shook off their fetters. They were headed by a comic elocutionist, who had for some years previously been hovering on the brink of the stage, and who, after a singular and somewhat notorious career, had found refuge in the bosom of the Church of Rome. Why he, and some few others similarly circumstanced, should have executed this deed, while Dr. Manning and Dr. Newman have not done so, we are not in a position to explain. Can it be that the latter thought their Anglican orders valid and indelible? During the subsequent year, twentyone gentlemen sought relief; in the year 1872, ten only applied to the Court of Chancery; and up to July, 1873, three only have enrolled their names there !

The first point, therefore, deserving notice is the extreme paucity of those who, having taken orders in the Church of England, have cared to escape from them. We often hear that, when prisons have been thrown open, one or two eccentric people, who have been long immured, have not cared to go forth into a world from which they have been long estranged. But in this instance the case is reversed. The multitude could have taken flight if they had cared to do so; but they have preferred staying in their old position, and it is only a few peculiar people who have gone forth. It surely is not an irrational conclusion, that Holy Orders in the Church of England are not, whatever they may be in other communions, a hardship or a bondage. If five hundred instead of fifty had returned to the condition of laymen, the argument would not be perceptibly affected. A good deal of compassion bestowed by our Nonconformist brethren upon Church ministers is therefore, on this score, superfluous. But if we pass from the consideration of numbers, and review the quality of those who have gone forth,

it may most truthfully be said that, with very rare exceptions, if any, they are not at all superior, in intellectual power or acquired learning, to those who have remained behind. By far the most conspicuous person is Mr. Froude, the historian, who outtops them all; and there are with him some half-dozen distinguished Professors and University graduates of mark, whose names would be found honourably mentioned in the lists of Degrees; but they are "rari nantes" in a very small whirlpool. The loss to the Church of intellectual men from among her ministers is therefore scarcely appreciable. She has not a Senior Wrangler the less, and hardly a First Class man. High intellect and profound learning of all kinds are therefore not incompatible with the retention of Orders. In very numerous instances, too, they are retained by those whose professional or scholastic duties might make them indifferent to the retention of them if they were felt to be really onerous. Again, it is a remarkable fact that, with comparatively few exceptions, those who have sought relief have not been persons who, so far as we could ascertain, have been at any period of their lives actively engaged in the duties of their calling. Probably not above half have been beneficed clergy, or even curates. Many have never officiated beyond reading prayers, or preaching an occasional sermon in a school or college chapel; and even of those who have held livings, hardly one can be found who occupied any sphere of importance in the Church. It is not that weariness which is the result of overwork in the Lord's vineyard which has induced them to surcease from their occupation. In some instances the livings held have been of that insignificant character that the mind, for want of sufficient employment, must have preyed upon itself in an unwholesome manner. Those who have been bearing the burden and heat of the day in populous parishes, and coping with misery and destitution in our metropolis and large towns, are still in the thick of the fight with Satan and his hosts. No standard-bearer from among them has fallen out of the ranks. Hard work, and plenty of it, has seemed to operate most beneficially in preserving from morbid fancies and discontented restlessness.

Again, it may be noticed that few, if any, have surrendered any emolument worth consideration. Many continue to hold as laymen the positions they held as clergymen; the great majority seem never to have taken more than a languid interest in their profession, and have for many years past desisted from any active employment, if indeed they had ever contemplated it, of which, so far as our research extends, we can find few traces. And this suggests a further observation. This relief has not been sought by the younger clergy, or those who might be supposed to be distracted by the controversies of the