Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
6 articles on this Page
- - - -THE RELIGIOUS DANGER…
THE RELIGIOUS DANGER OF THE CONTINENT. If the philosophers and the masses are in accord on the Continent, as Mr Disraeli says they are in England, the Priests will one day have to pass through a bad quarter of an hour. One of the most marked signs of the times in Catholic countries is the extent to which irreligion is becoming a religion, a fanaticism as fierce and as propagandist as that of any creed has ever been. The change is not perceptible in the Protestant States, where irreligion tends towards indifferentism, or rather to a tone of mind lower even than that, the tone of England just before Whitfield began his career, a tone under which the supernatural is neither loved, nor hated, nor feared, nor discussed, out simply ignored, as one might suppose it to be among bees. There is plenty of spiritual energy left in Protestant Germany, but in places and among certain classes of society, especially the very respectable, spiritual life seems to have been smitten with paralysis. A friend who has been end' 0' some months in Hesse says that nothing reSl lIlo h t 'al"t struck him, when fresh from the controversial vivacity of English life-where people now discuss the First Cause in drawing-rooms and argue about the soul over their soup so much as the apathy of the educated upon the whole subject. They seemed to feel about theology as men without ear feel about music, as some- thing some people were interested in, possibly a some- thing great, possibly a something trivial; but anyhow, a something of which they understood neither the laws, nor the motives, nor the pleasures, nor the pains, nor even the terminology. Scripture to them was as Handel to the deaf, spiritualism as counterpoint, a great theological work as a great oratorio. It was not that they wanted none of it; their indifference went even farther than that, till it suggested a natural incapacity. This, however, is not the tone of irreligion in the Catholic countries of the Continent. There the new attitude of Catholicism, its fiercely aggressive obscurantist and persecuting tone, has irritated sceptic- ism to passion, to a hatred of Catholicism and its ministers which in its ferocity and the concreteness of its manifestations recalls the days of the first French Revolution. The laughing scepticism of polite society" is vanishing away, and in its place we have a propagandist spirit which cannot be content without overt acts. Men write, it is reported, from all parts of France to congratulate M. de Sainte Beuve, most brilliant among essayists and among the few remaining masters of the lost art of conversation, to congratulate him on maintaining the "sacred cause" of Materialism in the Senate, and one such correspondent signs himself a member 11 of the grand diocese," thus making of denial not only a creed, but an ecclesiastical organiza- tion. Others, said to be thousands in number, bind themselves by oath never to accept the services of the Church in life, in death, or after death to be married by civil ceremonial, to reject the "last offices"-which in Catholic countries have a social as well as religious importance-and to be buried in unconsecrated ground. Our readers remember the astounding explosion of materialism among the students from all parts of the world who assembled at Liege to advertize their scorn and hatred of the ideas involved in the words" God," and soul," and revelation," and Church," a scorn and hate to which words seemed inadequate to give ex- pression except in phrases that smelt of blood. In Belgium, where Ultramontanism has selected its battle- ground, materialism, utter and propagandist, is the creed of all but the religious, and is CMompanted by a desire not merely to quit, but to put down mS Church as an evil thing, a foe to human society. The struggle is regarded as one beewson Civilization and the Sylla- bus, as a warfare between irreconcilable ideas, in which every weapon is tu be welcomed and quarter is dis- graceful. M. de Montalembert, who, if a bigot, is furthest of mankind from a fool, declares publicly his belief that Paganism is winning, that the Continent is on the eve of a bulst of irreligion, or hatred to reli- gion, such as even the iieroiation did not produce, in which all institutions claiming to bo divine will be overthrown, and men commence the or- ganization of a new and secularist world. So terrified are many thoughtful men at the prospect, that Protestant statesmen like Guizot sway towards Cathol- icism as the only visible buttress against the wave, and -most significant sign of all-fervent Catholics hesi- tate to proscribe Renan. In England we think him sceptical, in France men orthodox to the backbone doubt whether his sentimental Unitarianism may not be a defence against infinitely more dangerous and thoroughgoing assaults. In Austria we have just teen an explosion of the same spirit, a majority of the Reicbsrath exultantly proclaiming that they were all Darwinian", or, as they strangely enough misrepre- sent that form of speculation, all materialists, intent, as they openly avow, not on limiting or denying the pretensions of the Church, but on compelling it to give up all effort or claim to interfere in any way whatever in human affairs. So long as this spirit was confined to a select circle, it would have little meaning except for students of the various forms of spiritual reaction but it is fast filtering downwards. That revolt of the School, iiisters in Austria was a revolt of the leaders of the peasantry, and was directed against id<'as as well a;- against priests. It is stated that the Kaiser has ad- mitted to the Vatican that on religious matters be is not a free agent; that all his soldiers could not enable him to veto the Godless bills;" and whether this account is correct or not, it is certain that the Austrian masses never got so excited on an) secular matter. We have often reminded our readers of the fact that a city riot in Belgium always includes an attack on priests or monasteries, and the curious state of affairs in the De partment of Charente is a present illustration of the state of feeling. The priests there are being protected by Lancers from the hands of their flocks, who, were the soldiers withdrawn, would tear them in pieces The Prefect's idta is that the people are passing through one of those paroxysms of credulity which occasionally seize whole nations-witness the witchcraft mania in so many countries-that they are deluded with a report that tithes are to be re-established. That may be the fact, probably is; but wild outbursts of that sort always embody some latent sentiment, some deeply rooted fear. The man who wants to kill his pastor—be I it remembered, an indispensable pastor under the Roman system—because the pastor may by possibility be going to tax him, who resists troops in his thirst for his cure's blood, is not in love with the priesthood. During the sixteen years of the Empire, the Ultramontane yoke has been pressed as sharply down as that of everv other form of authority, and without disparaging, far less denying, the theory that France has in places become more religious, we cannot but doubt whether there is not also a genuine hatred of Priests as meddlesome officials of the arbitrary sort, or, as the peasants themselves phrase it, with moustaches sharply drawn up under the nose, as "the black gendarmerie." We confess that as we read of the spirit which mani- fests itself in France, Belgium, and Austria whenever pressure is removed, we scarcely wonder at the vehe- mence, or the rage, or even the cruelty of the priest. hood. They must feel as the priesthood of the third century felt, impelled at once by an imperative duty and an overmastering fear, as if they were once more fighting a Paganism which, if victorious, would throw them to the lions. If their adversaries win in their present temper, their lives will scarcely be safe and if their lives are safe, the institutions in which they trust, and to which, be it admitted, the majority of them are sincerely devoted, will be overthrown. It must not be forgotten that to sceptics in Catholic countries the Church presents itself as a corporation which must either be let alone or destroyed, no medium course getting rid of its transcendental claims. In a panic which is not all or even principally selfish the clergy are losing their acuteness, and making blunders which only serve to intensify the hatred of their opponents. They are falling back on their centre for support till their internal freedom threatens to disappear, and the Pope has the courage to ask the Church to pronounce him infallible, and they are endeavouring to reduce those who adhere to them to an almost military obe- dience. The attack is so determined, defeat would be so terrible, that they incline to place organization above all things, to expel their own ablest friends, if they show the smallest symptom of independence. To take a single illustration of their policy. The very best friends the Clerical order can have are the few highly intellectual men who strive to reconcile Rome with the modern world, who maintain that Christianity is com- patible with any form of material civilization. To such men, the only men who stand between them and the materialists, and the only teachers who might in the last resort teach the masses that no dogma can produce hunger, that freedom is consistent with belief in the Real Presence, and that the unity of the Church does not  .u -nt.jD t Ultramontanes, con. ?cd'by Tom^ impfe ^y ?amontanes, con. driven by terror for the future of mankind, offer the Syllabus, under penalty of being considered foes like the Voltairains and the Materialists. Naturally, the intellectual Catholics and the laity refuse, being unable, to deny what they see-that civilization is good; and the Church is really reduced to what its enemies call it, a corpora'ion hostile to society, and as such, in the judgment of those enemies, to be ecrasse, razed of the ground it cumbers. The Church offers in Catholic Europe only the alternatives of abject obedience or hostility, and Europe, unable to obey without discretion, accepts the alternative. It is not with pleasure but with pain that we record a growing doubt whether M. de Montalembert is on the right, whether, if Rome does not change her policy, Europe may not see an explosion of irreligion, or fanatical hatred to religion of every kind, false and true alike which will make the last quarter of this century the darkest through which modern man has passed. We like not Catholicism, with its sacerdotal claims, or Ultramontanism, with its machine-like obedience but either is better, Hindoosim is better, we had almost written Fetichism is better, than the foul creed which papal madness is establishing, the creed which has for solitary profession the dogma. Sugar is sweet. "—Spectator. 1
IECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCE.…
ECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCE. I PREFERMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS. I Rev Ebenezer Anderson, B.A. Rector of Manston, Dorset. Patron, J. T. Leather, Esq., of Leventhrope, Hall, Yorkshire. Rev P. R. Atkinson, Rector of Pusey; Rector of East Hendred, Berks. Patron the Bishop of Oxford. Rev Thomas Hanley Ball, M.A.; Curate of Stepney. Rev J. C. Bellet, M.A.; Curate of St Thomas's Portman-square. Rev Thomas Brooke, M.A. Perpetual Curate of the new church of St John, Baguley (Brooklands). Patrons William Cunliffe Brooks and Thomas Brooks, Esqs. Rev A. E. Bull, B.A.; Curate of Heston. Rev A. R. Carter, M.A. Curate of St Barnabas, Homerton. Rev H. N. Collier, M.A.; Curate of Marylebone. Rev J. B. Doyle; Curate of Holy Trinity, and St Mary, Guildford. Rev Alfred Dutton, L L B.; Curate of Whitechapel Rev F. C. Finch, L.L.D.; Curate of St James's, Garlick Hytbe. Rev Joseph Hammond, Curate of St Paul's Leeds Perpetual Curate of St. Mary Elms, Ipswich. Rev R. J. Htynes, si.A., Curate of the Brill Mission, Somers-town, Incumbent of St. Jude's, Whitechapel. Rev J. H. Hewlett, M A.; Curate of Holy Trinity, Upper Chelsea. Rev C. G. Hutchins, M A Curate Senior Curate of St Thomas's, Ncwcastlc-on-Tyne. Rev George Rimsden Knowes, B.A., Licentiate in Theology, Durham Incumbent of St Paul Liverpool. Patron, Robert George Rainsden, Esq. Rev F. Meyiick of Norwich; Rector of Blicklinu with Erpingham Norfolk. Patron, the Ma:quis of Lothian. Rev Henry John May; Rector of St Swithen, Demerara. Rev Joseph O'Dwyer Military Chaplain of the Third Class. Rev Donald Millman Owen, M.A.; Vicar of Marks Tey. Rev John Papillon, Rector of Lexden Rural Dean. Rev J. Raine, Prepeud of York Rector of All Saints York. Patron, the Lord Chancellor. Rev David Roberts, Curite of Coyty; incumbent of Bettws Garmon, near Canarvon. Patron, the Bishop of Llandaff. Rev J. H. Rose, B A.; Curate of St James's Clerken- well. Rev Evan Rutter, Curate of James's, Ratcliff. Rev T. Warren Trevor, M.A., Curate of Dolgelly Incumbent of Penmon with Llanvaes, near Beaumaris. Patron, Sir R. W. Bulkeley. Bart. Rev Horace Edward Wickham Rector of St Peter, Essequebo. The Rev Charles Dodgson, M.A., Archdeacon of Richmond, Canon of Ripon Cathedral, and Rector of Croft, near Darlington, died on Sunday evening rather suddenly. The Archdeacon had been out within a day or two, but was seized with a severe attack of diarrhoea, which carried him off in a few hours. The Archdeacon was appointed to the living of Croft in 1843, by Sir Robert Peel. It is worth, according to the Clergy List, £ 850 per year, but it is understood to be now in value above £ 1,000. The deceased was a High Churchman, and has delivered some remarkable charges at his visi tations. He will be known to some in consequence of a controversy on the Eucharist, which occurred be- tween him and Dr Goode, the Dean of Ripon, three or four years since.
LLANELLY HARBOUR. 1
LLANELLY HARBOUR. 1 Another special meeting was held last Saturday, to ear the report of the deputation appointed to meet the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company. There were present-Mr J. H. Rees, (chairman,) Mr Dunkin, Mr nslow, Mr O. W. Nevill, Mr R. Nevill, Mr Glascodine, 1' W. Morris, Mr D. Lewis, Mr Rosser, Càpt. Luck- rut*. Capt. Roberts, Mr S. Bevdp., Mr R. B. Jones, Mr Tonels, (Caeffir,) Mr D. Evans, Mr H. J. Howell, Mr WR,dLIle, Mr. W. D. Pilipps, Mr W. H. Nevill. "he Chairman said he had been too unwell to accom. lIany the deputation to the directors' meeting, but read to them the basis on which the company willing to treat" Minutes of conversation ?? ""?sen a deputation of the Harbour Commissioners nd a Committee of the Directors of this Company. 'rho deputation was informed that the company would ot object to treat with the commissioners for dock eitt?e 8ion on one of the following basis, viz. ¡-1st. ch 0 Harbour Commissioners to float the company's chari according to Mr Rendall's plan, to be submitted i o?'approval 2nd. The works to be carried out by the com ssioners under inspection by the company. 3rd. 00 e ock when complete to be handed to the railway ^oiDa 4th. The railway company to guarantee the t???terest and repayment on ?2?,000. 5th. The commis- kis8iOllers to I?':ndertake interest, &c., on 10,OOO from ,lieh they ?ihall take one moiety after payment of the ?rkin ? expenses of the increased receipts of the docks, either fro- vessels over 400 tons or of the amount ?ove present receipts of the dock, until the commis- ?tier ?  repaid such £10000 with interest, upon Of he docks to be the sole property of the company. ,or the co issioners and the company to join in 119 940,ooo from the Loan Commissioners, each Qkíng to bear its own proportion, as may be ?eed? t? the annual charge for interest and redemp- tioUji 2nd. The parties then to divide the increased *8cepi 8 ove the present receipts of the existing dock e't the 8ai^ proportions that they bear to the annual j °^«rge receipts of the existing dock to be pre- ( ??Pu<??y 8'??°? and agreed upon. 3rd. Working viPeUtoS be paid by each party at a per centage ^ore j- ?Qre <T ?*?§' the receipts, or the railway company I ??eps >? to receive a proportion from the commis- CQllt s. T appeared from this that the company ??tej.h -P??d avoiding altogether the agreement of ?64 Y which their dock was vested in the oommis- ? of fk^8' and themselves becoming eventually the owners t h e new docks. He then alluded to the company's ?? P?SlUon to the commissioners' Bill in the Lords, j >j ^e said was owing to the extension of time for c°ta i t ??t-h?? -ing the agreement of 1864. The company ) ",2"'ted ? extension of time for that, but not for  ,ne aock. lie also proposed to read certain "tt? ?lating- to the Bill in Parliament; but it was ?j??'\ to, on the ground that it would expose the I C(iOUiii ^Loners' case to their opponents. ^Ir ?'P?ers' case to their opponents. 1w W. ~^ev^ ?d. that, in accordance with their ?deufi they had met an executive committee of the ?ect(? ?' ?hey explained the nature of their mission, %ttd a'o()",Siderable amount of conversation was carried basis of agreement presented to the com- ?sioQ? ?' he would now regard simply as a commis- itr4 8101ers hewould now regar d simply as a comm i s- II<>rne lUn ?? as one of the deputation. Although ?"? mi?ht "? it a gratuitous remark, he believed tthey0 US> to lay down certain principles or rules of ?tioQ f action f?r ^u^.ance in laying out their money. He !? sca.r? say that the first rule would be that the ?y—???y te40, 00 from the Loan Commissioners, and t'4.ge of r°m the town-should be to the best advan- t0 t'lof e0re,3eit and future requirements of the port. ?ho? n fOible to ho be laid out so as to be as little burden as r?e to? P?sent trade of the port. He did not ?tate tos  they were not justified for a moment in ?P??n? a. ? me present trade for the benefit of the ?re. Thp^ i i,,t,, ll'Y ?? take care that new burdens were f"?' future laid on the trade, in the shape of increased 6, and tariffli they must not, in fact, place the fni Ure trade a. worse position than they were in f4t Ile trade1'1'  worse position than they were in er4,%lv,ef 3.4gain they should remember that they hE?dri- ght whatever to lay out borrowed money ? ??lativ?Av r "P? future contingencies. Whatever TVer the t. Parliament might confer, they had no or the A, t. Parliament might confer, they had no ^er to accmiv. property not an acre of land, by the etpert t ""?e Of orrowed money, upon the strength of the Pro te"O of future trade. l01168 asked Mr Nevill if he was going to orrt??"' if not he deemed these remarks Or r. W, 1*?ev ill said he was, with the chairman's per- ?iasioQ I utterance to a principle which was clearl ,gIVing utterance to a principle which was C^early ^ed in his own mind, that they had no ^olnfo ?ght to spend sixpence in acquiring property ??itnh ?? ?Towed capital. He then went to the proposals ic 0,,t al?led objections, but objections which were ?? p ?le of being overcome. The main objection to the tosal was that the commissioners were tied  to the outlay of X35,000. Now, it was impera- t{y" ?? they should consider the contingency of ???i B? to incur a larger expenditure than XIO'000 and ? tofJ proposal allowed for no margin of uncertainty kg to the amount of money to be spent. The second ?P<?T was capable of being carried out, but his own pt.f ellellee in favour of the first. He thought it ?oul? ? was in favour of the first. He thought it VVGQ,Lbe 'uwna wise to commence their proceedings by a ^finite r e'^uti°ii, because they were not very conver- ? llt,wl. tlx the proposals, and after they understood them to a. qll etr, a resolution could be framed. In reply ?d? epa?n ?n from Mr R. B. Jones, he said that he n! a n¡ dJ the deputation, now, to have done its duty ;2t? rae d iurt, ? communication to the company, and the cl),,ailli,,i( )ners must take some steps upon what the Y had rought about.  B. Jones said they must take some action upon the Proposals before the meeting. The railway com- f h ^y said th eY were prepared to enter into negotiation to doo.W ?tension. TUs ^extension. T}? ??rnian asked if the commissioners were .?? n? + f ?"'??er the heads of agreement, and enter a fr(1 treaty under the present Bill. i 1,, "\v eviU asked why they should be bound by -?of ? ?ked why they should be bound by Of Ft eenierit which had been virtually put out '.the One. Tkh r we are bound by them. Ch ^rmaQ—But we are bound by them. dIrec. tor e'vill-Suiect to the approval of the direc- ? ? thought the question before them ought to ? ???? ?'?Pective of the Act of Parliament or the ??< of ?????"?' It was a question of arrangement f *10 with the railway company. ?Mr ? Jones suggested that further action should -? ?? y appointing a committee to meet the com- objected to that, but was willing to er ?'Q.objected to that, but waa willing to ??epth? ?th?e ? Qrat proposal be laid before the meeting. ?t l?,81?er explained to Mr W. Nevill that as one of ?" r?so????? mmittee, he did not consider Mr Nevill's ?°Ur8e ° action at all antagonistic or disrespectful to th at ?'°'?'t?e, which was appointed simply to take t,4ur6 th'3'11 through Parliament, and they dare not act t ^her than that. Proposals which came from the potup SOmetime ago did not come to that committee, 1 to t? he Dock Construction Committee. The same ?se ?ould have been taken with the present pro- ? ?'? ? ? ? there was no reasonable argument to prove that 14'5'Dld ittee was being superseded or insulted. Mop? i evill said there were before them certain P'Dsals ich they must either consider or not con- ,0? ?hi-ch they must accept or refuse, or modify. h ee"o* ) If t^ey agreed with him that it was useless to fi/ 8?bject farther, they naturally came, at once, i the Cnsideration of the proposals before them. The 4t "t'ati-n- had taken a form which, he thought, many thB ? desired they should take. The great ?cn '? to the first proposal was that it limited the ??b))"-y of the company, and left the liability of the ^n^g.y.oners unlimited. The second proposal was t%i, and reasonable, it was also desirable, as it threw  great part, if not the whole, of the management of ^dertaking on the company. He had always bge of opinion that the company, and not the commis- Sj0h rs» should bear that responsibility; it gave the ??toisaioners the means of assisting in what they juddered public improvements. It was reasonable t4h,t the commissioners, as a public body, should give, J. the assistance which their position enabled them to J?B, to any other public body which was disposed to '^Prove the port, or make additions which would be £ improvement to the general trade of the town, and *'?ard the sole object for which, as he took it, the ? ? already obtained had been carried through. ? )4r W. Nevill asked whether it was not now time for ^al resolution. Ur (3 W. Nevill said his idea was that they should ??o?-Tro' ugh the proposals; then he was prepared to kov, ? necessary, which he thought it was not, that the first proposal be not accepted, and further hb eOul move that the second proposal, for t ??t' at all events, be accepted. To ttJ.a oe with matters of detail, he might re- ?ark that the company had named a definite sum, ?0 nn' th&t sum, if the proposals were accepted barn; and without modification, would be the sum jo?y' borrowed, and if that sum would not, after all, ??k e thb dock, and pay the expenses hitherto idc rred, the commissioners would, on their own se- cUr'- ty, have to negotiate another loan to make upthede- ?'tY, have to negotiate another loan to make up tbe de- ()lenc, which wns undesirable if not impossible, either ? '?ir own security, or on the security of the new ()ks, in the shape of a second mortgage, after the &tlsfaction of the ?40,000. Therefore no limited sum 4h -'?d be agreed to, except such a one as would '8^ them would cover all they wanted to do. They II ?ld, in fact, name a limit beyond which they did t10t d b esire to join the railway company in borrowing. sUn¡ of £ 50,000 had always been the amount named, :l1d he supposed that the commissioners had satisfied "?selves the £50000 was needful, and it would be :ell to adopt that sum, the proportion to be borne y each party, being settled by a certain number of '?Qnssioners and directors. So that he would Prefer as a first step, some such resolution as—that it is ^irable to join the railway company in borrowing a ^tain amount, and that the interest and repayment of ?ch Sum be borne by the commissioners in such pro- *?tioQ as may be mutually agreed upon. He would ther not move it himself because, although he was ?d to do so now, he had taken no part in the ration before, and was not disposed to put himself ?Ward in it now. Bat, that time might not be wasted, he suggested that somebody should move some such resolution as he had read. That was with reference to the first clause of the second proposal. The Chairman said he understood that the com- pany only contemplated the floating of the channel according to Mr Rendall's recommendation, which would not cost anything like B50,000, therefore L40,000 would be enough. Mr W. D. Philipps-Our estimate was £ 35,000. Mr D. Lewis said the company's object was to reduce the outlay to the lowest possible ebb. He had men- tioned it to the commissioners at their Board some time ago, and he did so again because it might be new to some of them. Although it had been said that this scheme was of recent date, and that this person and that person had taken the question up, he could only say that as far as the railway company were concerned, it had been taken up universally, a long time ago, and so much so that instructions were given to the engineer to go into the matter and make calculations. He did so, and his estimate for floating the dock channel was jE37,000 but in that estimate was an item for making a false channel because the dock gates were to be placed at the bottom. It was right to say, as the com- missioners were going into the question of expenditure, that upon the estimate of their engineer, tenders were asked for, and a bona file tender was sent in for something under the estimate. It was idle for the commissioners to consider an enormous outlay for the company would not entertain it. What they wanted was an additional floating dock for large vessels to go into and if the trade required it they could got other appliances afterwards. When a careful estimate was made, and a bona fide tender received on that estimate, they had no right to say that the estimate was a false one, or too little, or that the engineer had gone into his account carelessly. More than that, Mr Rendall went into the question subsequently, and gave an approxim- ate estimate which agreed with that of the other engineer. What other inference could be drawn from that, but that the estimate was a fair one. If the com- missioners contemplated a large outlay they must not expect the assistance of the company. They had been into this question before, and would have brought it about had it not been for want of means; therefore, they were not likely, now. to go in for an increased expenditure, to obtain that which they could have for a lesser sum. MrC.W. Nevill was anxious to have the work done for the lowest possible amount, and thought that question should be discussed with the company. Whatever the amount was, it was an absolute necessity that it should be borne mutually by the company and the commis- sioners, in proportions to be agreed upon, and that I there should be no exclusive risk or liability to the commissioners. Mr W. Nevill wished to discuss formally and metho- dically the question as between the two sets of pro- posals. One proposal was in the nature of a loan by them to the company, repayment being guaranteed by the company and by the finding by the commissioners of a certain sum. The other proposal was in the nature of a partnership with the company, involving the out- lay of a larger sum than that contemplated in the first. The first set of proposals was based upon the view that the commissioners were to improve the company's pre mises by allowing them to spend £25.000) which they were prepared to stake, and repay in a certain time upon certain conditions. The commissioners were prepared to stake 110,000 in the shape of a loan, to improve the company's premises, and to secure the advantage of an increased revenue from a larger number of ships, which it was supposed the expenditure and increased accomo- dation would attract there. He was compelled to give preference to the first set of proposals, because he held they had no right to spend sixpence in acquiring pro- perty-they ought not to become partners with the company, even in the proportion of one-tenth of the property acquired. They spent a sum of money in speculation. If they had that money at the bank, in the shape of surplus dues, to the extent of £10,000 or 415,000, they would be justified in spending it in what way they thought best for. the port, and on the chance of future advantages but they ought not to spend six- pence in that way when they not only had no money of their own, but even had to borrow to pay preliminary expenses. The first set of proposals provided all that they ought to desire or expect-such increased harbour accommodation, and, therefore, increased harbour dues as would bring greater prosperity to the port, and enable them to repay the £ 10,000. They were at present in doubt how much they would have to spend. The com- pany objected to spend more than 25,000, and they could not come to a conclusion on the matter until Mr Rendall's plans and estimates were before them. But he repeated that they had no right to speculate in acquiring property with borrowed money they had the right to spend it for the good of the port and town, and repay it as fast as possible. He therefore suggested that the deputation be instructed to continue the dis- cussion with the company on the basis of the first set of proposals, having regard to the wishes of the com- missioners, whatever they might be. The Chairman thought they would, practically, have to abandon the argeement of 1864 which the company repudiated, and which they could not be compelled to execute-and enter into a new agreement. The com- missioners unfortunately were bound by the argument to a certain extent, but owing to the loose way in which it was drawn, the company were not bound, unless a majority of the shareholders consented. He asked what was the use of obtaining an extension of time for completing the heads of agreement, when the agree- ment could not be enforced. He understood that if the commissioners gave up the heads of agreement the company would forego its opposition to the Bill in the Lords. He seriously advised that the Parliamentary Committee be instructed to give up that portion of the Bill relating to the heads of agreement. The Clerk was proceeding to say that it was fair the Board should know something which he was about to tell them when,— Mr Rosser cautioned him that it was unfair to divulge anything in public about the Bill. The Chairman thought the whole matter ought to be before them. Mr Rosser said they were met to consider the report of the deputation sent to the railway company, but there seemed absolutely nothing before the meeting at present. The Chairman asked what was the use of the com- missioners going one way and the committee the other. Could anybody say that it would be of any use to carry the heads of agreement through the Lords. Mr D. Lewis said they could not be carried through the Lords they were disposed of in the Commons, except as to additional time. The Chairman denied that and read the amended clause as follows The time limited for the comple- tion of docks, railways, and works, which the commis- sioners are authorised by their Act of 1864 to make is herein extended to a period of five years from the pass- ing of this Act, and the heads of agreement shall be read and construed as if the period thereby fixed for the commencement and completion of the Dock extension began from the passing of this Act." It was his duty as chairman to suggest the abandonment of the heads of agreement. Mr Rosser said he would oppose it till a resolution of some kind was proposed. Mr W. Nevill then proposed, That the deputation already appointed be requested to meet the company again and discuss dock extension on the basis of the first set of proposals having regard to the following points more particularly 1st, the sum which the com- pany are prepared to provide as regards any increase on the sum of £25,000 (Mr D. Lewis That is the sum they have fixed upon") and 2nd, provision for future tolls not to exceed a stated tariff." Mr Rosser said that now there was something before the meeting, he would say a few words. This was the state of things The Parliamentary Committee were instructed to procure a Bill in this session the com- mittee were proceeding with it, and doing the best they could in the interests of the commissioners. He under- stood the procedings taken by the deputation were irrespective of the Parliamentary proceedings. (Mr W. Nevill: "Directly, but indirectly they are not.") He hoped when their Bill had passed through the Lords, that the commissioners would be in a position to make an independent dock at Llanelly. (" Oh. ") They had only to arrange their money matters, so that they could erect that dock, and they had plenty of time to carry out the works. In the meantime it was suggested that, to save the trouble of making an independent dock, an arrangement should be made to do the work jointly with the railway company. From experience of the company he was not sanguine of an advantageous arrangement being come to; but he was content to let the deputation see what they could do, wished them success, and would give them any assistance in his power. The first step had been taken, apparently with satisfactory results. He asked them not to go further to-day than to appoint another deputation, to discuss the proposals, and bring the Board some definite basis to proceed upon. He was not prepared yet to go into the proposals presented to them, although he was as conversant with the subject as anybody, and he pre- ferred that the deputation should see, the company again, and present the commissioners something that they could recommend. But while on the subject, he asked the deputation to remember one circumstance in any arrangement which they might be tempted, to propose with the company. Mr William Nevill had told them that the interests of the company and the commissioners were identical. He would remind Mr Nevill that the railway company were a railway com- pany not only to Llanelly but to Swansea, that the commissioners' interest lay entirely at Llanelly there- fore, the interests were not as it were identical. The railway company, while always professing their desire to assist dock extension at Llanelly, and so on had, even while negotiations were going on, spent a very large sum of money in making a line to Swansea. Mr D. Lewis—Pardon me, it is a separate concern altogether. Mr Rosser hoped Mr Lewis did not want to make further difficulties. It was true that the company called their Swansea capital a separate capital, but he was bound to tell the commissioners that it was very much the same thing; that was to say, there was only one Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, and it ran to Swansea as well as to Llanelly. It was true that they separated their capital, but it was also true that money for the Swansea undertaking had been raised on the Llanelly undertaking. They had not only laid out a large sum in making a line, but X40,000 or X50,000 in affording shipping accommodation at Swansea he meant the branch at the south side of the docks and other shipping facilities. The company went further; they had engaged to ship at Swansea for the year end- ing January, 1869, 320,000 tons of coal. Mr R. B. Jones rose to a point of order. Mr Rosser said these were facts which the commis- sioners ought to know. The Chairman-Let there be a full discussion. Mr Rosser said the company had engaged to ship at Swansea in the year ending January, 1869, 320,000 tons of coal; in the year ending January, 1870, 384,000 tons in the year ending January 1871, 448,000 tons in the year ending 1872, 512,000 tons. They had engaged to ship at Swansea all these thousands of tons of coal, or to pay the dues upon them. The quan- tity shipped at Llanelly last year was 429,054 tons, which was less than the quantity the company had engaged to ship at Swansea. He asked the deputation and the Board not to lose sight of these facts in any arrangement they might enter into with the company. He did not understand what Mr William Nevill meant by saying that the commissioners had no right to acquire property by borrowed capital; their Act of Parliament authorised them to borrow money, and if they exercised that right, and laid the money out, so far should he be from agreeing that they had no right to acquire property by it, that he should assert they were neglecting their duty if they did not hold property for the money laid out. The main point with him would be to see that property was held. The money was borrowed on public security, and no arrangement for spending it without acquiring property ought to be carried out. As to the estimate there was not much difference. The commissioners had one of 140,000, and the company had one of 37,000, which was not much of a difference. The company had got carefully drawn estimates but the commissioners had a contractor to take the work at the sum named. Mr W. Morris-Does that include anything for land, because you will want land. Mr Rosser said it did not; but he believed that land, and engineering, and other expenses, would bring it up to 450,000. He told them, blink the matter as much as they liked, thlt new docks would cost about the sum he had stated. They might hope for this and hope for that, and he had no objection to hope with them but there were such things as facts, and all the hope in the world could not upset them. They could not materially vary the works the dock was their security for the loan therefore to some extent their hands were tied. About X2,134 would be required for the annual interest, a little more than £1,000 each. That was nothing to frighten them they had a surplus of £ 700 a year, and X400 from the Local Board. The company seemed willing to go in for zC25,000 and a negotiation seemed easy. He did not object to each party finding half the money, and the interest in the concern must be represented by property. He disap- proved of the idea that the commissioners should pledge their security and hand the property to the company but from the spirit in which the company seemed acting there ought to be no difficulty in making an arrange- ment. Mr W. Nevill restated his argument as to the acquire- ment of property, stating that the money being borrowed, made all the difference. He admitted that they got a property in the shape of increased dues, or else it would be useless to go into the matter. Mr R. B. Jones contended that principles for the commissioners' guidance were laid down in theAct, and Mr Nevill was not competent to alter them. Mr W. Nevill-Do you mean in the heads of agree- ment. (Laughter.) Mr R. B. Jones-Not at all. Mr Rosser wished to explode the idea that the com- missioners bad no right to go into works further than the money in the bank actually allowed them. Mr D. Lewis asked Mr Rosser how the commissioners would be able, by the Bill in the Lords, to make an independent dock because they were in just the same position as before with regard to the heads of agreement. All they could do was to throw the disputed question into Chancery. Mr Rosser would not discuss Parliamentary business, but he would be very sorry if the Bill as amended by the Lords would not enable them to make an indepen- dent dock. The Chairman-By the heads of agreement ? (Laugh- ter.) Mr Rosser-I don't care whether they go to the winds or not. (Laughter.) A discussion arose as to the power of the committee to strike out that clause from the Bill without the sanction of the Board. Mr Rosser quoted the resolu- tion appointing the committee to prove that they had such power, which the chairman denied. After a long discussion, Mr C. W. Nevill moved .Llcv i l l moved That the commissioners join the railway company in borrowing a sum not exceeding Y,50,000 for payment of Oipcnaoe already incurred, for purchase of land, and for completion of the works, the interest and repay- ment of such sum to be borne hy tho nnmmis»iiinp.rs and the company, in such proportions as may be fixed." The costs already incurred was an important item, or the commissioners might find that they had heavy costs to pay, and nothing to pay them with, nor one iota of security to get money with. He included purchase of land if it should be required. Mr Rosser said the commissioners had given Parlia- mentary notices to obtain land, so it did not depend upon an if," and might be left out of the resolution. Mr W. Nevill as his brother's amendment left the question open, said he he would not press his motion. Mr D. Lewis hoped he would, so as to have it on the minutes. :r' It was eventually agreed that Mr Wilham NevIll should accept and propose the resolution framed by Mr Charles Nevill which was seconded by Capt Luckraft, and carried. up a Mr W. Nevill said the deputation would brmg up a recommendation at an early day, and the Board must accept or refuse it, as it would affect indirectly their Bill. The Chairman gave notice that at the next meeting he would move that the Parliamentary Committee be authorized to abandon the heads of agreement of 1864. It was resolved That the Chairman, Mr W. H. Nevill, Mr R. B. Jones, Mr W. Morris, and Mr W. Thomas, be appointed a committee to discuss with the railway company the amount proposed to be borrowed, the proportion in which such amount shall be borne by the commissioners and the company respectively, the present amount of the receipts and working charges of the dock, and such other details as may appear to them desirable, and that they report to a meeting of the commissioners to be convened for the I ournose. u Mr Rosser urged, very strongly, the policy of replacing Mr W. Morris by a townsman,-Mr B. Jones, Caeffir. Mr Bevan did not see that it mattered whether the committe were connected with the company or not, as long as they got the docks. (Hear, hear.) Mr Rosser then moved, and Mr Dunkin seconded, that Mr B Jones be on the committee. Mr B Jones said he had no desire to serve; he would rather not. The Chairman, however, took the votes, Mr D, Lewis, protesting that Mr Rosser wanted to be the exponent of another man's feelings. Mr Jones was elected by 6 to 5. The chairman not voting. Mr Rosser thought the chairman ought to have voted. (Laughter.) A motion that the recommendation of the commi.t,tee to the next meeting should be printed, and sent to each member, concluded the business, which occupied nearly three hours.
EPITOME OF OPINION IN THE…
EPITOME OF OPINION IN THE LONDON PAPERS. PRINCE ARTHUR. The Post considers the fact of Prince Arthur re- ceiving a commission in the Royal Engineers to be very significant of the times in which we live. It is a matter for curious reflection why officers of the scientific corps, merely because, as it would seem, they possess special scientific attainments in addition to the ordinary qualifications of military officers, should have been as a rule systematically overlooked when selections were made for the higher commands of the British army. But as Sir Robert Napier is an officer of Engineers, and as Prince Arthur has been appointed to that corps, this appointment may perhaps mark the commencement of a new era by the abolition of the rule of exclusion which virtually, if not actually, existed, and for which no valid reason can be in any way assigned. But, be that as it may, it is a subject of gratulation to the country that the princes of its Royal family not only take an active part in the affairs of the nation, but are not above learning their work. And it must also be a subject of gratulation to the scientific corps that at last, and for the first time, a prince of the blood royal has elected to commence his career in their branch of the service. The Standard observes that before the young Prince can attain the position to which it is only reasonable to suppose he may one day be appointed much of the system that has lasted for centuries will probably have fallen beneath the reforming scythe. He will hear as he mixes with the military world, strange doctrines around him. He will meet those to whom change is obnoxious, and others who crave for novelty. And he must learn to think for himself, and to rely upon his own judgment amid conflcting arguments. He must be I wedded to no party. He must be no opponent of reform, and no lover of innovation. In these days, when even royalty is not held sacred by the democrat's tongue, a prince's safest claim to the highest post in the army will rest in his own individual merit. And this Prince should surely not fail to substantiate that claim, for he has no want of ability, he has staunch integrity, and has been blessed with rare opportunities. COURT COSTUME.-The Standard suspects the present style of Court costume will not be endured much longer. In a claret coloured coat, flowered waistcoat, black breeches, and white stockings, it is difficult for a man to look like a gentleman at all, or like anything but a footman in an inferior suit of livery. THe practical point to be considered is, if the present fashion be abandoned, what is to be the nature of the change P There need be no difficulty on this score. The uniform of the Diplomatic or ordinary Civil Service might be taken as a basis, and without any invasion of official rights, a costume assigned for the use of private persons. There is no reason why a civilian out of office should not wear a semi-military drpss as well as a civilian in office and where special dresses arc designed nobody thinks of adopting any other. As it is large nuzrbers of gentleman never go into the presence of the Sovereign because they have not the courage to appear in the masquerade pre- scribed for them, which is condemned on every side as ugly inconvenient, and full of ignoble associations. A Decade Of Pau £ ekism. —A recent parliamentary return shows the growing cost of pauperism. In 1857- 58 the whole expenditure from poor rates and from sums received in aid" was £ 8,450,000. It is now (1866-67) no less than £ 10,905,000; but as payments to highway boards enter into tho latter but are excluded from the former amount, the actual increase over 1858 would seem to be about X2,000 000. The increase in "relief to the poor only" constituted more than half the last sum. The total outlay under this head in 1867 was £ 6,960.000 against X5,879,000 in 1858, or more by £ 1,'081,000, that is, 18 per cent. The national calamity of the cotton famine was felt with the greatest force in the rates of 1868 and of 1864, yet 1867 sur- passes the mean expenditure of those years by half a million sterling. Wheat was cheaper < during the Lancashire distress than in 1867 in 1863 it was 52s Id, and in 1864, 53s 2d, while in 1867 it was 53s 7d. This may account for some part of the difference, but not all. 1. 1861 and in 1862 wheat was higher, 55s 10d and 56B 7d respectively; the average amount of relief was Y-5 1928,000, or LI,032,000 lower than in 1867, though wheat was from 2s 2td to 3s cheaper in the last-named parochial year. Again, the average number of paupers in 1863-64 was 1,047,000 and only 932,000 now. Henct, according to the Poor Law Board's own statement, although 115,000 fewer paupers were on the union books last year, the ratepayers were called upon for £1,000,000 more than sufficed for a far longer muster-roll of claimants. They paid upwards of 17 per cent. more than during the American war in spite of a decrease of 11 per cent, in the numbers to be relieved. Taking the metropolis by itself, the tables show that the average number of paupers in 1858 was 73,000, and in 1867 nearly 50,000 more, or 122,500 in all. The relief in 1858 amounted to Y,862,000 last year it was ZI,175,000, or 3(5 per cent. increase, thus showing a rate of development which is twice that of the kingdom generally. THE Probable VALUE OF Corn.—The Economist notices that the present very high price of corn, and the natural notion that if we have a good harvest no such price can be maintained, have led some persons to ima- gine that the fall in the value will be very speedy and very violent. But several circumstances combine to indicate that this opinion is mistaken, and that the de- cline, though inevitable, will be gradual, and be spread over a considerable period. This was the case the last time when wheat was at a price at all like what it is now. The average price in July, 1856, was 76s Id, and it declined during the two next years, being 63s 4d in July, 18,57, and 44s 7d in JIIIY, 1858. It is true that the proximate cause of the high price in 1856 was not the present cause. In 1856 the value of corn was raised by a deficiency in the foreign supply the Russian war had shut us out from one of our great granaries, and the price rose in consequence. In 1868 the price has been raised mainly by a deficient home supply. The harvest of 1866 was bad, and that of 1867 was worse, and in consequence we are importing very large sup- plies of foreign wheat. This year during the four months ending the 30th of April we have imported 2,661,898 quarters, which is on a very large scale in- deed. Some writers, indeed, exaggerate in speaking of the import of 1867 as beyond precedent, for in 1862, only six years ago, we imported 9,458,578 qrs. Still the present import is very large, and has alone pre- served us from famine prices and an approach to starva- tion. But from this it follows that the fall in price is, at least on one ground, less likely to be exceedingly rapid t.han it was in 1856" The cause of scarcity being a defiClent home supply in two successive harvests, the home stock is excessively low and therefore the mar- an d therefore the mar- ket is strong because the near domestic supply does not press on it and it is only reduced by the foreign import. The principal depressing element in 1856 and 1857 does not operate so strongly now as then. Nor is there any excessive foreign supply to cause a sudden catas- trophic fall. The comparison of the first four months of the present year with past years is this —Wheat, 1866, 1,657,709 qrs. 1867, 2,144,277 1868, 2,667,897. And considering that in 1865 and 1866 we had greater supplies in the country than we now have, this increase is not one which should terrify or alarm us. At the same time, no doubt, if there is a good harvest here and in the principal corn-growing countries, the price of wheat will tend constantly downward for many months, tV"' violently, or so as to cause sudden ruin. THE HOUSE OF OR1J" IRISH CHTIRCH.-The Tunes argues that, instead of opposing, uum L""a a„ay and Lord Cairns should support the Suspensory Bill. Lord Grey has always demanded the redistribution ot the revenues of the Irish Church and Lord Cairns has assented to a redistribution within the communion. It is clear that the funds of the Irish Church are more than can be usefully applied to its service (and upon this question of fact one may appeal to the evidence taken by the Commission), and a case is made out for withdrawing the surplus funds of the Establishment and for passing the Suspensory Bill as the first step to- wards this withdrawal. Yet it is certain-though the leading opponents of the bill, and every educated man who holds that the Irish Establishment cannot be main- tained as it is, are morally bound to support it-that the Suspensory Bill will be rejected. The question of the day will be presented at the hustings not merely as the redress of an enormous grievance in Ireland, but also as a contest between the popular and the hereditary branches of the Legislature. It is plain, indeed, that the rejection of the bill cannot prolong the existence of the Irish Church, and this consideration may prevent any exasperation of the public mind, unless it be pro- voked by the injudicious language of some of the de- fenders of the Establishment. But if there be no ex- asperation, it will be only because something like contempt has displaced it. The popular verdict is certain and irresistible, and the House of Lords, although conscious that they must presently yield to what they now resist, are about to disparage their reputation and weaken their influence by solemnly re- cording their vote in favour of maintaining an injustice which the nation has decisively condemned.
| MADAME RACHEL AND MRS. BORRADAILE.…
| MADAME RACHEL AND MRS. BORRADAILE. I The hearing" trf Mdme. Rachel's case was proceeded with on Monday, at the Marlborough-street poiiee- courc. Mr Digby Seymour, the counsel for the accused, applied for at; adjournment, urging that Mdme. Rachel was suffering frorir indisposition, both physical and mental. He produced a Certificate, signed by Sir W Fergtisson, to show that she wfis DOt in a condition to be pressift. But the magistrate reminded the learned counsel that ufesrlt every day last week Mdme. Rachel was haunting his toftrv, and said it was singular, to say the least, that when sho was really wanted, she waa in- disposed. He intimated in the plainest terms his belief that there was nothing' the matter with her, and that this was an attempt to frustrate the ends of justice. He would only yield to Mr Seymour's requwt perforce, on some medical man getting into the witness-box and declaring that Mdme. Rachel was unfit to attend; if this evidence was not forthcoming, she must be sent for, and she could sit in the clerk's office while the ex- amination was continued He would consent to that arrangement, but he must have her within the precincts of the court and see that she surrendered to her bail. Her daughter could come with her if she liked. The case was then proceeded with. Mr Montagu Williams called Mrs Borradaile, who, in answer to his questions, said she was arrested for debt on leaving that court last week, and a detainer waa lodged against her at the suit of Mdme. Rachel. With regard to the letters read, in which Lord Ranelagh's and Colonel Edwardee's names are mentioned, she had to say that she had not seen her cousin. Colonel Edwardes, for three years. No letters had passed between them. She knew- noth. iug of him, but she should recognize him if she saw him When the name of William was mentioned in the letters she asked Mdme. Rachel what it meant, and she said it was only to create jealousy between Lord Ranelagh and her. The letters were not always about money. She always understood the letters were from Lord Ranelagh. The other person—William—was a fictitious person. Mr M. Williams read from a letter already put in evidence the following words:—"Had you married me as you promised in the presence of your three sisters, Frank, Mrs Lily, and Mrs Stephenson,, I should not have written to the Plough Hotel, Chelten- ham, to prepare apartments," and asked who dictated that letter. Mrs Borradaile replied that it was Mdme. Rachel who said Lord Ranelagh had promised to marry her in the presence of the persons mentioned in the letter, but she had never seen the persons in her life. Mr Rendall, the corn cutter, was called by Mr M. Williams, and said he remembered Mrs Borradaile ealling upon him on the 14th of February last, relative to the extraction of some corns, and be had some con- rersation with her. Mr Rendall went on to say that subsequently a person called upon him relative to Mrs Borradaile and himself, and he asked him who be was, and he said" Hanelagh," Ihe witness replied, "Lord ltanelagh ? and on his saying Yes," and that he was the affianced husband cf Mrs Borradaile, the witnesi told him that he was an imposter and ordered him out. of his house. Mr Rendall said that the person who called upon him was of light complexion, had light whiskers, and was about ten years younger than Lord Ranelagh. Lord Ranelagh was called by Mr M. Williams and said: In consequence of receiving letters from Mrs Borradaile, he communicated wit,h his solicitor, and with Mrs • Borradaile's solicitor, Mr Cridland. He believed some- thing like two years ago a lady was introduced to him by Madme. Rachel as Mrs Borradaile, but he did not recognize her as the Mrs Borradaile present. Perhaps she bad now a wig on. If she was wearing her own h ,ir. she was not the name person he was introduced to. Mrs Borradaile said she was the person. Lord Rane- lagb, continuing, said the words that passed at the time were, Mrs Borradaile-Lord Ranelagh." He was told Mrs Borradaile was present at Beaufort House when there was some conversation about private theatricals. He never told Mad me. Rachel that he was prepared to many Mrs Borradaile. He had stated this twice ou his oath, and he itg,in !-aid it was a gross ialsehood and a lying story from beginning to end. One or two trades- people having been subt-eciuentty called who had supplied Mrs Borradaile with goods, Mr Montagu Williams said that so far as Madame Rachel was concerned that was the case, but he reserved to himself the right of charging other persons. Mr Knox said he thought the case was a very simple one, and he knew no reason why he should make a distinction between Madme. Rachel and the poorest person. The expenses would be less if the case was sent to the sessions, and at present he saw no reason to alter the usual course of sending it there. The case was adjourned to Tuesday, when Madame Rachel was committed for trial at the sessions.
[No title]
The Manchester Examiner says that the Leominster magistrates have recently fined five boys Is each and costs, with the alternative of seven days' imprisonment, for playing cricket on Sundays. In many parishes of England that we could name cricket is openly played on Sundays, with the very best results to the local sobriety and morality. We wish some member of the House of Commons would call the Home Secretary's attention to the alleged act of the Leominster bench, and would endeavour to discover what is the law on the subject.— Pall Mall Gazette. If it be true that a section of the English Catholic peers are hesitating whether to absent themselves from the approaching debate on the Suspensory bill, or to attend and vote (or at least speak) against the second councils intheRoman lish and Irish" will be once more, as before tffeKeiortfiif'" tion, party names amongst them. The diseetablishment of the Irish Church being a question on which all Irish Catholics are unanimous, the ropugnance which a cori tain number of English 'verts do not conceal for that measure is all the more significant. Their asserted grounds of objection are silly enough. -The time is not ripe Catholics ought to wait for the conversion of the protestants, and then the Church will resume her own. The principle of spoliation is bad; and Mr Glad- stone loves Garibaldi, whom Mr Disraeli hates, as tOØ do Pall Mall Gazette. In this country our attempts to pay compliments are not always remarkable for grace or success. As Mr Disraeli might say, they lack finish. During the last few days several of the papers have been trying to ex- tend a civil welcome to Mr Longfellow, and it is curious to notice how disagreeable and unpleasant they have contrived to render themselves. The design was pro- bably to give a hearty greeting to Mr Longfellow, who is undoubtedly the noblest representative of the most cultivated section of New England we have yet had among us. We could not say welcome," without criticising our visitor's clothes and sharply inspecting his credentials. One speaker in behalf of the public praises him for his Excelsior," and totally forgets that he has but recently given to the world a scholarly trans- lation of Dante. So that even the critical lectures which have been read to Mr Longfellow cannot have had the merit of recalling to tbt: poet any beauty in his works which he had forgotten. Our means of honouring distinguished strangers are not very con- siderable, but the reason is not obvious why a gentleman who comes over to admire our old churches and green fields should be compelled to listen at each step to an elaborate judgment ou every line he has ever written. Mr Longfellow is not appealing to the public in any way he is not here to give readings from his works. Of course any one is free to criticise these works when- ever he likes, but to fancy that we are showing a fine hospitality and a delicate kindness by publishing review, more or less intelicitous, of Mr Longfellow's poems, is a Ntrringe misapprehension of the duty which we owe to ourselves or to the stranger. When a public writer .,oes visiting he does not expect to find a criticism of his productions put by the side of his breakfast cup every morning. You are tolerably welcome, but you are not a very great man after all-we can show you ijigger men"—that, in a few word", is what some of our contempoiaries are saying to one of the finest scholars, and most genial and cultivated men of whom the United States can boast. We cannot do much for Mr Longfellow, but it is in our power to let him alone, and refrain from following him about wherever he goes with small patronising and depreciatory pats on the back.-Pall Mall Gazette. Reports of Polish insurrections promise to become as frequent and as apocryphal as those of insurrections in Bulgaria. A month ago the rumour was spread all over Europe that Polish insurgent bands had appeared on the Galician frontier, and on Monday the Daily Telegraph suggested in a leader that these reports, if unfounded, may be only premature," and declared it to be certain that there has been a reappearance of the symptoms which have ordinarily preceded the an- nouncement of a Polish insurrection," at the same time improving the occasion by reading the Poles a lecture on their obstinacy in refusing to yield to Russia, and advising them to adopt the policy of Marquis Wielopol- ski, their wisest and most patriotic .1 general" (ne), and reconcilethemselveswith the Czar. Among the symptoms of the coming storm the Telegraph mentions the rumour about the insurgent bands, which it represents as having been circulated by the Polish emigration, the revival of anti-Muscovite demonstrations at Warsaw, and "gatherings of exiles at Cracow." We should like to know the authority of the Telegraph for these singular and alarming statements. In the first place, the false reports about the insurgent bands were circulated by the Russian officials and not by the Poles. 11 Anti. Muscovite demonstrations at Warsaw" of any import- ance would, we imagine, be somewhat difficult to get up under the present regime, and all trustworthy accounts from that city represent it as neither more rebellious nor more discontented than usual The belief in sup- posed machinations of the Polish emigration at Cracow or elsewhere, with the object of preparing a new insur- rection, is equally groundless. Both the Polish press and the principal Polish leaders take every opportunity of discouraging revolutionary tendencies among their countrymen, urging them to labour hard at increasing the material prosperity of their country and improving the condition of the peasants, so as to render themselves worthy of enjoying independence when the time comes for achieving it. It is idle, however, to talk of a recon- ciliation between the Poles and the Russians so long as the natural hostility of Poland to her oppressor is constantly kept alive by new acts of persecution and injustice-