Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

In the Press, and Shortly will be Published,

The Communion of Saints:

THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE SET FORTH FROM HOLY SCRIPTURE AND THE FATHERS AND ANCIENT BISHOPS OF THE UNDIVIDED CHURCH.

By WILLIAM GRANT,

Author of "The Catholic Doctrine of the Christian Sacrifice and the First Principles of Ritual," &c. London: JOHN H. BATTY, 376, Strand, W.C

In Neat Wrapper, pp. 48, price 6d., by post 64d.,

The Catholic Doctrine of the Christian Sacrifice;

AND THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF RITUAL. WITH REMARKS UPON THE USE AND SYMBOLISM OF THE VESTMENTS, LIGHTS, INCENSE THE MIXED CHALICE, THE SIGN OF THE CROSS, AND THE POSITION OF THE CELEBRANT. By WILLIAM GRANT,

THE

20 0

2 2 0

...

Miss -, per Mrs. Adlam

Rev. David Wright

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Tebbs, Esq.

...

James Gingell, Esq.

Mrs. Phillott (Florence)

Miss Caroline A. Buckston

Mrs. William Mathews

St. John Mathews, Esq.

Miss Empson

Mrs. Phillipson

Miss Marriott

Mrs. Marriott

[ocr errors]

500 500

2 2 0

1 1 0

[ocr errors][merged small]

5 0 0

5 0 0

5 0 0

1 0 0

10 0 0

10 0 0

2 0 0

1 0 0

10 0 0

1 0 0

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

Demy 8vo., cloth extra, with Photographic Portrait and Illustrations, price 12s.,

EMORIALS of the Late Rev. Robert

ME

STEPHEN HAWKER, Vicar of Morwenstow. By the Rev. F. G. LEE, D.C.L.

"I can hardly find words to express to you how much I like your Memorials.' The truthful and most charitable loving-kindness running through the whole book shows the true friend in need to one who rever ought to have been judged like another man."-Rev. R. S. Hawker's Sister to the Author.

CHATTO and WINDUS, Piccadilly, W.

[blocks in formation]

and COMMUNION of the SICK. Arranged as Said. Intended chiefly for the Use of the Sick Person and Those who Assist in the Chamber. Set forth with Notes and Directions in the hope of Promoting greater Reverence and Understanding in the Celebration of this Sacred Office.

"A most admirable publication has just been issued 'The Order for the Communion of the Sick, with Notes and Directions.' As a practical help to Clergy who desire to celebrate and minister the Holy Mysteries with reverence and care, we know of no volume likely to serve their purpose better. All the directions are full and lucid, while the author's own valuable dissertations are evidently the work of one who writes from experience, and who writes con amore."-Union Review.

London: THOMAS PRATT and SONS, Tavistockstreet.

REFORMED FUNERALS with Patent

"EARTH to EARTH" COFFINS upon the principle advocated in the Times, and dispensing with all procession. Explanatory Pamphlet, with List of Charges, may be had gratis on application.

LONDON NECROPOLIS COMPANY, 2, Lancaster Place, Strand, W.C.

[blocks in formation]

Being the Order of the Administration of the Holy Eucharist according to the Use of the Church of England, with the Complete Devotions, Literally Translated, of the Ancient Liturgy of the Western Church; the Offices of Preparation and Thanksgiving before and after Mass, and some Rubrics from the First Book of King Edward the Sixth.

[blocks in formation]

and here comes a man who will acknowledge himself to be a Ritualist, who thinks it a good work to put all the idolatry back again. And his reason is that he finds it in the Ancient Liturgy of the Western Church' Prayers rejected by our Reformers but now reinstated as part of the Communion Service or Mass-service, which is now circulating by thousands among people who still profess to belong to the Church of England. When the young Victoria ascended the throne of England were there even so many as a score of churches open every Sunday morning for early Mass'? At the present moment are there not nearer a thousand?"-The Record.

.

"Mr. Grant may be commended for his skill in making a harmonious whole out of incongruous materials. Perhaps its least attractive feature is the title. It may be very true, that by our Reformers the highest act of worship was commonly called the Mass; and it is equally true, that it is a convenient little term just adapted, by its brevity, to modern English usage, and therefore not at al unlikely again to come into coumon use but its reintroduction must be exceedingly gradual."-John Bull. "It would be curious to conjecture how the Public Worship Act, if fully developed, would deal with the

66

compilers and clerical users of so astounding a compilation as The People's Mass Book.' "— Weekly Register.

"There is much in this new Manual which is of pecial value at the present time. Its chief feature consists in giving as devotions for the people either the actual words of the Secreta,' commonly used by the Celebrant, or prayers closely founded upon them. Persons using this book, therefore, will not be at a loss to know what the Priest is saying at the various parts of the Service, but will be able to offer the same prayers that he is offering, instead of having long prayers provided for them which cannot possibly be said in the interval of time allotted to them.

The Rubrics from King Edward's First Prayer Book in this little Manual are also an advantage at the present time, when mauy talk about that Book and few know what it contained."-English Church Union Gazette.

"Will no doubt be found highly useful, as the form is convenient and the type clear.'-Holy Teachings. "A cheap little book. It contains the entire Eucharistic Office, interpolated with Meditations for Private Use, Prayers for the Dead, Commemoration of the Living. &c. The Rubrics from the first Book of King Edward VI. in themselves show the real meaning of those ritual observances which have been so resuscitated during the last few years."-South London Observer.

"Nearly every doctrine which the great Reformers turned aside as the out-worn rags of superstition is here gathered up out of the dust, and carefully pieced and tagged together. Two or three years ago it would scarcely have been attempted to publish such a Mass Book as the present for the use of the English laity."-Echo.

London: JOHN H. BATTY, 376, Strand, W.C.

THE PUBLIC WORSHIP ACT AND THE WAY TO MEET IT.
This Day, Price One Shilling, by post 1s. ld.

DO THEY WELL TO BE ANGRY?"

A SECOND LETTER ADDRESSED, BY PERMISSION, TO CARDINAL MANNING.
WITH AN APPENDIX ON THE HIGH CHURCH PRESS.

By PRESBYTER ANGLICANUS.

By the same Author, price 1s., by post, 1s. 1d.

CHRISTIANITY OR ERASTIANISM?

A LETTER ADDRESSED, BY PERMISSION, TO HIS EMINENCE CARDINAL MANNING, ARCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER.

[blocks in formation]

A Journal of Religion, Politics, Literature

No. 11.-VOL. I.]

and Art.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1876.

DR. TAIT'S GATHERING OF QUACKS AT LAMBETH.

[ocr errors]

R. WHALLEY, during the debate on the Education Bill last Thursday, somewhat sagely remarked that the Archbishop of Canterbury "was appealing to Methodists, Quakers, Jumpers, Baptists and Jugglers of all kinds to help the Church of England to save something of the wreck of Christianity "-a shrewd and graphic statement which appeared greatly to amuse the House. And no wonder. For once in his life Mr. Whalley hit the right nail on the head. He described the absurd and insincere Episcopal Prayer Meeting at Lambeth very graphically, where every Quack recommended his own nostrum, and wanted to prescribe for his neighbour. Whether Mr. Whalley's Dissenting friends will relish his description remains to be seen. Save the Archbishop of Canterbury, every one appreciates the joke of his having called together as mongrel a crew as was ever gathered within the walls of Lambeth Palace. But, of course, few Scotchmen can understand a joke, and nobody ever accused Dr. Tait-the-ponderous of being specially witty.

For ourselves, we can truly say that of twelve out of the fifteen Dissenting preachers there assembled, we know simply nothing. We never, as far as we remember, even heard their names.

Now considering the impudent and arrogant manner in which Dr. Tait notoriously treats his own Clergy, we think it odd that he should have mixed himself up with these heretical and schismatical preachers. On a recent occasion, at some local meeting, Canon Jeffreys of Canterbury somewhat feebly expressed the indignation of the Kent Clergy and laity, at being called together for an autumnal "Conference," and then being subjected to listen (whether they liked it or not,) to a prosy and Erastian diatribe, a wearisome lecture full of scolding and bad language, from the Archbishop; who, in his turn as Chairman took good care that neither layman nor parson should have the opportunity of saying a word in reply.

It is true, of course, that the report of the gathering at Lambeth, which Dr. Tait approved before it was sent to the newspapers, did not contain much information. What it did say, or imply, was that English Christianity, as represented by 66 our pure and apostolic" Establishment, was in rather a bad way shaky on its legs, incoherent in its talk; nebulous in its principles, and somewhat inefficient in its action and triumphs. But supposing all this-as Archbishop Tait's doctored report avers-to be the case; how can any Dissenting Tag, Rag, or Bobtail,- -even though a "Professor" or a preacher,-mend matters? The remedies which the Archbishop would like to apply would be, firstly, the Abolition of the Athanasian Creed; and, secondly, an interchange of pulpits with all kinds of Dissenting preachers. Of the depth of his Grace's love for the Creed in question, we all know something. As regards the interchange of pulpits, his own Chaplain has been often put forward by him as a pilotballoon to find out how the land lies. His Grace has set his heart on effecting the exchange in question: for, of course, neither Messrs. Minton, Fremantle, nor Kirkman would have dared to have preached at the Gothic Surrey Chapel without being assured of sympathy and protection from high quarters. Again. If the Bishops do not know how to deal with Infidelity-as no doubt they do not, for their abject impotence is the laughing-stock of Papists and Infidels,-it seems only reasonable that they should first turn to members of their own Communion for aid, rather than to aliens and enemies. Archbishop Tait's line is certainly not one calculated to defend anything but jobbery-that undoubted virtue which he persistently practises with daring ability, and defends by the golden eloquence of a discreet silence. Dr. Tait might exclaim to alter slightly Lord John Manners's well-known

verse:

[PRICE THREEPENCE.

Let "laws" and learning, "Creeds" and morals die,

But leave me still my right of job-be-ry!

Our own astonishment is the greatest when we mark how some of his Suffragans are ready to join in his Grace's discordant concert, and aid in playing his discreditable games. If he begins to sound forth a screeching tune on the pious bagpipes, London sits by thumping the two-noted drum, Peterborough is ready with the big bassoon, and Gloucester with his own personal penny trumpet-a musical instrument often played and well-known to the public. At the tea-party and prayer-meeting in question, the prayers must have been subjectively impressive, and the tea-table conversation, like the tea, very exhilarating; for the company was strictly harmonious, and the advice from conflicting religious quacks regarding "saving something of the wreck of Christianity" as Mr. Whalley so forcibly put it-must have been, no doubt, uniform and unique.

For ourselves we should like to have been there and heard something of this "New Comic Gospel." The advice of the Baptists on the Sacrament of the Font; the counsel and goodwill of Unitarians on the Christian Creeds; and the pious recommendations of Presbyterian prophets on the principle of Episcopacy and Bishops-true-to-their-principles, would have been at once expressive and well worth hearing. It would have realized Mr. Whalley's idea of "irreligious juggling." Of course Dr. Tait-whose predecessors have been "given to hospitality "-can ask whom he will, either to breakfast, luncheon, tea or dinner; and the amusement of his guests may consist either of croquet or controversy-but if His Grace would take our advice he would not degrade the high office he so unworthily fills, by gathering round him the tuborators of modern Sects,-each disputing with his neighbour -to seek their futile aid in difficulties which he and his school-the Arnolds, the Stanleys, the Huxleys, the Jowetts, the Rowland Williamses and the Colensos-have mainly created. Soon all his Grace's personal friends-lay as well as clerical, fourth cousins as well as first cousins, (the lay at the British Museum, of which his Grace is an ex officio Trustee, and the clerical in the Diocese of Canterbury,)—will have been well provided for, out of that public patronage, the possession of which he has told us is a sacred trust; and then he himself could suitably resign on six thousand a-year and the life-use of Addington-making way for some. body who, we trust, may have some slight inkling of what honour and official honesty mean-for the hour has arrived when for the National Church such a man is sorely needed.

K

SCHOOL BOARDS.

"

NOWING well enough how sadly modern Englishmen need backbone and pluck, we are, nevertheless, much mistaken if some little vigour be not shown at the coming School Board elections in November. When John Bull's pocket is touched, he begins to own some kind of sensation. And, in the case of the School Board, his pocket has been touched with considerable effect. It is not the

fashion, at present, to do other than glorify this new institution. Liberal fanatics are delighted with it. Dissenting tub

*We venture to express our unfeigned sympathy with young Mr. Craufurd Tait, that the recent scheme by which he was to have been so comfortably and cleverly provided for, suddenly collapsed. We will not, just at present, reveal the details, nor show the tvisted wires and damaged springs. Suffice it to say, that there has been a temporary collapse, a flash-in-the-pan, a conjuring-trick which faled. Unfortu nately Robert Ripon "-his father-in-law elect-has little patronage patronage. No doubt, however, that these pious Prelates between them. worth having, or he night arrange some underground exchange of

[ocr errors]

will be equal to the emergency. Where there's a will there's a way. We are on the look-out for the consummation.

[ocr errors]

orators, with whom hatred of the Church is a virtue, see in it a delightful mode of crippling the Established Church; Secularists acknowledge it to be a most efficient engine for propagating their pernicious and dangerous principles; while Churchmen, as is usual in their case, have shown very little spirit or pluck in defending their old and true position. Though there are a majority of Churchmen on the London School Board, yet they have done little or nothing in stemming the tide of evils arising from the Education Act; and now, apparently, consent to swim with the tide. Several of them are so disgusted with the old-womanish policy of such persons as Lord Mayor Cotton-a very weak-kneed Conservative, and a much over-rated man-that they have resolved to retire. Some of the best men, including Canons Gregory and Barry, Lord Napier, Mr. G. T. Miller, decline to be nominated again. On the other hand, the Roman Catholics are on the alert, Sir Charles Clifford and Mr. W. S. Lilly being before the public as candidates for seats on the Board,-and we hope that a good and influential minority of representatives may be secured to them.

Our contemporary, the Globe, has put the case well-not from a Christian, but from a popular and pocketty point of view: "When financial considerations come under notice

for fifty prisoners. They are good enough to intimate to
Mr. Cross the character of the punishment to which they
will subject their prisoners. For the first offence of truantism
they will award six days' incarceration; for the second, a
a month; and for the third offence the incorrigible truant is
to be sent to an industrial school in the ordinary way. In
the latter case the ratepayers of London will have the privilege
of keeping the truant for six years, a relief which many parents
will be only too ready to accept. But there are parents who
feel some kind of affection for their offspring, and who in
addition to insulting visits from inspectors, and the occasional
beating of their children, will hardly relish the additional
torment of a private prison. Moreover, if boys and girls are
to be handed over body and soul to the Boards, the next
proposition may be for a private prison in which to fling
refractory parents. There is as much reason for the one as
the other. No, Mr. Cross, you must not grant the prayer of
the School Board for London-certainly not without sub-
mitting it to Parliament. The other day a man, who had
been sent to prison for neglecting to educate his child in the
way selected by the School Board, hanged himself rather
than live under such a training of the law. Lately several
cases have been brought before the magistrates in which
teachers have beaten their pupils with canes.
informed that caning the hand is a common form of School
Board brutality, and if we were unfortunate enough to have a
child of ours forced into a Board School we should not wait
for the law to punish the coward who beat it. At the same
time we are not in favour of breaches of the peace, and we
hope the Legislature will provide against this form of law-
lessness by compelling the Boards to conduct their schools
without the exercise of corporal punishment." No wonder,
therefore, that people are beginning to see through the pre-
posterous proposals of certain semi-demented educational
doctrinaires, whose madness at times takes a methodical
shape, though at other periods it exhibits many of the
symptoms of stark insanity. The broad question, as well as
its leading details, are before the ratepayers. If they like the
present extravagant and odious system, let them ungrumblingly
support it: but if, on the other hand, they do not, let all
those who have aided in saddling the country with a profit-
less expenditure of millions be sent adrift with promptness,
and be rejected with well-deserved ignominy.

We are

ROYAL COMMISSION AND OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY
FOR PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ON

foes begin to grumble. They argue, cogently enough, that since the School Board Rate has risen to 41d. in the pound in less than six years, some satisfactory assurance ought to be given that ratepayers are not about to be launched upon a limitless ocean of expense. It is quite true, as an abstract proposition, that no description of education, however advanced, can be considered too good. Practically, however, this proposition is greatly governed by the fact that the School Board system is supported by compulsory contributions from the public. They therefore have a perfect right to declare that no more money shall be extracted from their pockets than will suffice to provide indigent children with the elements of knowledge. It must be remembered that only the minority of ratepayers are in really affluent circumstances. A very large section can scarcely be considered so well off as the very classes whose children are educated at Board Schools. They may, perhaps, receive large incomes, but their social position necessitates many sacrifices to keep up appearances that are not required in a lower grade of life. Have they not, then, fair cause for discontent, when they see in action a process which seems calculated to give the children of the poor a gratis education of a higher sort than they can afford for their own offspring? This question THE REVELATIONS OF THE REPORTS OF THE really governs the whole agitation in connection with the cost of the School Board system, and not, as Sir Charles Reed and the Lord Mayor would imply, any doubt as to the fact that the London School Board has done good work." It is this question-a very practical one-which the ratepayers must face and act upon. And we trust they will do so with vigour. In so doing, let them bear in mind the following, which deals exclusively with figures and results. Figures are popular. Results are too often put aside as untrustworthy. Yet according to a Parliamentary Paper recently issued, only 30,000 more children are being educated in all London than was the case immediately before the Elementary Education Act came into operation. The expenditure of the London School Board is about a million of pounds a year-thus each of the additional children educated has cost the poor down-trodden ratepayers £30 a year!!! Yet with such a fact before the Board, for it is well-known, some of the more owlish of the membersthe beggars who have been set on horseback, the Liberal Dissenters who so munificently and recklessly spend other people's money,-there are all kinds of additional expenses being formally proposed-e.g., drawing, drilling, bathing and calisthenics-a swindle, the like of which has not been seen or heard of for generations. If the British Public in London do not act in November, in the interests of economy and common sense, we shall be very much mistaken.

Another monstrous proposition is also on the cards, as we learn from our able and high-principled contemporary the Hornet-a serial which does not hesitate both to expose swindles and show up shams: " The School Board of London is not content with the use of the public prisons, they want one of their own. This is not satire, it is fact. They have actually applied to the Home Secretary asking permission to erect a private prison for the punishment of incorrigible truants.' At first they only propose to provide accommodation

VIVISECTION.

[ocr errors]

[COMMUNICATED.]

HE doctors and physiologists of to-day have established a new hell for animals; have invented a new and more horrible class of tortures, unknown to and unconceived of by the old inquisitors. Oh! what would not Torquemada and St. Dominic and their fellow-friends have given for the Satanic genius of these modern doctors! Making artificial fistulas and tubercles in the stomachs and lungs of dogs; giving dogs emetics and then tying up their throats to render vomiting impossible; inflaming the spinal cord of an animal by passing a thread through it; dividing nerves of the most sensitive character; injecting all sorts of burning acids, acrid fluids, virulent poisons into the veins of animals; cutting out part of a creature's liver, or brain; tying up its gall-duct; passing electric shocks through the exposed brain, or across the eye, &c.,; scraping away the cornea of the eyes of frogs, and then burning them with nitrate of silver, or acids; tying up the arteries of animals; tying up the intestines; dissecting the nerves of the spinal cord; inserting the limb of one animal into the body of another; inserting a limb of one animal into the stomach of another, to be eaten off by the gastric juice; exciting the most violent agonies and convulsions in animals by injecting foreign substances, almost every known chemical, however deadly or caustic, into the jugular or other veins of animals; pinning them down on boards and exposing the heart, the liver, the brain, or other interior vitals; again setting them free, leaving them in such mangled condition for weeks, for twenty days, in one case for ninety days; sometimes repeating again and again these villanous operations; cutting, burning,

mangling dogs, cats, rabbits, horses, &c., and leaving them for fresh outrages; piercing a certain spot in the brain to see a rabbit spring from the table in a violent spasm of agony; the chest opened and the heart drawn up; irritating internal wounds with cantharides; cutting away parts of the liver of cats and dogs with a galvano-caustic knife; opening the stomach of a dog long starved, and pouring in a mass of liquid Prussian blue!

But these are trifles. The Royal Society for P.C.A. has done the public the eminent service of collecting from physiological works and parliamentary evidence alone 121 closely printed pages of its Report on Vivisection, of such outrages repeated in every imaginable manner, and chiefly in Great Britain! Doctors, English ones, not only practice such things but teach their pupils that boiling frogs alive and starving dogs to death, gives no pain, but only a little discomfort! See the exidence of Drs. Gibson, Pavey, Erichsen, Klein, &c., before the Parliamentary Commission on Vivisection; with evidence regarding the public experiments of Drs. David Ferrier and Burdon-Sanderson-Ferrier on different occasions being represented as making the agonies of his victims subject of jest and laughter! The R.S.P.C.A. opens one section of its Report with these words :-"Burning and scalding of thirty dogs!" (See the Report, p. 57). Such are the monsters who are preparing for the British public as the medical attendants on the sick and dying beds of the most refined and humane families; of the delicate and tenderhearted daughters of England,—a race of men without sentiment, without feeling, without reverence-a veritable gang of unsouled Frankensteins, inflamed by a quenchless mania for mangling and torturing, who, if they could lay hold on their Creator would try to Vivisect Him! Certainly no time, no country, no false institutions have produced a type of men more odious or infamous. Yet the Parliamentary Commission praised these doctors as humane men, and these doctors praised one another as humane! If such men be humane, how angelically humane must the old inquisitors have been!

And now it comes out that anaesthetics do not always extinguish the sense of pain, but carry some animals into the other extreme of hyper-aesthesia; paralyses them, as cororara does all, but leaves them conscious of their agonies! (See Evidence of Royal Commission, 4108; of Dr. de Noé Walker 1810; and Dr. Hoggan in the Morning Post in the Spring of 1875). Nay, they may double their sufferings by inducing hyper-æsthesia.

Yet, after these confessions of the Vivisectors, anaesthetics are held up in proposed Acts of Parliament and by the Royal Society for P.C.A. as full protection of Vivisected animals against all suffering! "The Animal World," says Mr. Colam, the Secretary of this Society, writing to Mr. Jesse, regarding my letters on Vivisection, "emphatically advocates the utter extinction of all torture." Thus is the advocacy of the R.S.P.C.A., and of the Parliamentary Bill of Lord Carnarvon, as well as those of Dr. Playfair and Lord Henniker, based on the most palpable delusions. The animals are given up to the Vivisectors on the faith of a protection which is 66 a delusion, a mockery and a snare." The R.S.P.C.A., in its printed Report on Vivisection, have thought it worth while to comment on my strictures in the body of the Report, and that after giving us those 121 pp. of the unparalleled atrocities of the Vivisectors-a catalogue of barbarities unmatched in all history. They indulge in a little sneer at my experiences so inferior to their own. The Society does itself injustice, forgetting how fully it has imparted to me, in common with all the public, all their experiences. From their Prize Essays of Fleming and Markham, and their Report on Vivisection, they have given proofs of the horrors of Vivisection more than enough to condemn it to eternal infamy in all sound minds. They say that there were Howitts who prophesied that the Act of Parliament against cock-fighting could not be carried out. Very likely; but has cock-fighting been put down? What says their own Report? That they have still, ever and anon, to drag to light both noble and ignoble cock-fighters.

The reference is doubly unhappy, as the Bill against cockfighting was a thorough-going Bill, a Bill for utter extinction of the evil, and might therefore be carried out by activity and perseverance. But the Society's proposed Bill is not a thorough-going Bill: it is a lame and emasculated one,

actually, under certain regulations, proposing to legalize Vivisection. But, as I have shown, neither the Society's Bill nor Lord Carnarvon's Bill can put down Vivisection whilst it is permitted in any form. The Vivisectors, on the approach of the Inspector, can always dab a little chloroform on the victim's nose, and heigh, presto! they are wholly en règle! I must repeat what I have before said, that whoever hopes to put down Vivisection on any plan but of absolute prohibition, pats faith in the sheerest delusion. The whole Report of the Royal Commission is full of revelations of Vivisectors acting in determined defiance of all recommendations of anaesthetics. Anæsthetics themselves are a delusion; they poison the blood of horses, are injurious to dogs, and cannot be given to frogs. (See Dr. Schäfer's evidence. 3797.)

[ocr errors]

Who shall decide when doctors disagree?" But did doctors ever disagree so stupendously as on this question? Never! The Report of the Royal Commissioners is a royal monument of the utter antagonism of opinion of the most distinguished of them. A host of them assert that Vivisection has made useful discoveries: as many, or more, and of equal or superior reputation, as point blank deny this, and give their reasons for it.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"

Again, we are greatly indebted to the Report of the R.S.P.C.A. for reprinting and putting prominently forward these diversaria. At p. 50 of the Society's volume we find a series of most shocking experiments, made for the Humane Society, decided as of no use. At p. 81, one hundred and seventy-six cats and dogs operated on "whose sufferings were too shocking to peruse.' Dr. W. B. A. Scott, after enumerating a number of atrocious experiments, pronounces them wicked, unimportant, and inconclusive." P. 102. Sir Charles Bell says, Experiments (Vivisections) have never been the means of discovery." P. 123. Dr. Garth Wilkinson says, "Vivisectional anatomy has contributed to healing of diseases nothing but false paths and wrong roads.' P. 124. Dr. Abernethy says, "Hunter's experiments have added no important fact to our stock of knowledge." P. 124. Drs. Murchison and Wagstaffe assert that experiments on animals are useless to man. Mr. Reynolds is of like opinion. P. 126. "Numerous experiments on the spleen of dogs have failed to discover the use of the spleen."-Dr. Epps. Dr. Dry, in the Lancet, says the experiments of Fritsch, Hitzig, Ferrier, Nothnagel, Gudden and others, "are worse than useless." P. 129. Dr. Savory, in the Lancet, says, "Confessions evoked by torture are justly regarded as equivocal." P. 131. The Court of Examiners for Scotland of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons declares "Performance of operations on living animals is altogether unnecessary and useless for purposes of causation." P. 132. Drs. Congreve and Bridges say, "The medical or scientific student requires no aid from Vivisection." P. 132. "Students," according to Professor Simond, "have become eminent without such help as this. Ordinary observation of the living body; post-mortems; observations of the progress of disease will make really good and practical physiologists.' P. 134. Professor Nichol said, "When an experiment involved pain to any sentient creature, it ought not to be made. There is an education in vice as well as in virtue. We are not more entitled to torture an animal than a human being without cause." P. 135. Dr. Bigelow, Professor of Surgery of Harvard University, addressing the Massachussetts Medical Society in 1871, said, "How few facts of immediate considerable value to our race have been extorted from the dreadful sufferings of dumb animals? Contemptible compared with the price paid for it in agony and torture. . . It is said somebody must do this. I say it is needless. Nobody should do it." P. 138.

[ocr errors]

The author of a letter in Nature says, "The right to inflict torture, for whatever purpose, is but the right of the strongest." P. 143. "Animals have their rights every bit as much as a man has his." Lancet, p. 148. "With very rare exceptions, we have it on high authority, such experiments lead to fallacious results." Times, Aug. 8, 1865.

Professor Sharpey said Harvey discovered the circulation of the blood through Vivisection. P. 156. Dr. George Macilwain denied this. P. 165. Sir William Fergusson said, "No great Vivisector has made himself a great surgeon by Vivisection. Experiments have not tended much to mitigate human pain. Experiments under anaesthetics do not yield good results, because the animal is not in a normal

pulpits and the Anglican Press assert Eucharistic reality versus
Eucharistic sham. Sham, however, continues to have its votaries,
and Abyssinian gold and yellow hair-dye will doubtless always
find buyers.
find buyers. Not always as heretofore, under their old
names; with a bold disregard for veracity, and with that
homage which hypocrisy, in the long run, is forced to render
to truth, we buy the same things simply as "gold" and,

condition." P. 161. After all the excruciating experiments
on dogs by injecting poisons into their blood, Dr. Swain
Taylor contradicted Sir James Paget, and declared that "He
does not believe that antidotes for snake-bites can be
discovered by experiments." P. 162. Dr. Klein's experi-
ments on sheep-pox were much cried up by some doctors, but
John Simon, F.R.S., said they had failed. P. 163. Dr.
Burden-Sanderson said, "The results will not diminish sheep-well-" wash."
pox." P. 170. Dr. De Noé Walker said, "Physiology has
never discovered one remedy for disease though it has
sacrificed millions of animals under intense suffering." P.
163. George Macilwain, F.R.C.S., said, "That experiments do
not conduce to the cure of disease. Hunter's cure of
aneurism was not arrived at by Vivisection. Animals do not
have aneurisms. Hunter's conclusions might have been
clearly proved in ordinary practice. Vivisection is a fallacy
in medical investigation and ought to be abolished." P.
165. Dr. Haughton said, "Experiments would demoralize
students and let loose a set of young devils." P. 166.
Dr. Burden-Sanderson boasted of the good results in con-
sumption from his experiments on tuberenlosis. Dr. Hoggan
said, "all experiments up to this time have only shown what
tuberenlosis is not." P. 177. Dr. Brunton stated that "the
enormous number of animals cut up at St. Bartholomew's
Hospital, ninety-five used in one series of experiments, had
given no results at present." P. 187.-(All these references
are to the pages of the Report of the R.S.P.C.A.)

The Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty has, I repeat
it, rendered a splendid service to humanity by bringing
together in this Report the revolting details of the atrocities
of so-called Science; of its infamous crimes against God and
His helpless creatures. True, the Society, with a habit
peculiar to itself, stops half-way in the remedy. It demon-
strates the greater, and adopts the lesser, result. Nevertheless,
it has unveiled infamies unexampled in history, and the wiser
public must profit by it. And we have now only to ask
whether what intelligent foreigners say of us shall receive a
national confirmation? Whether, as they say, the bugbear of
England is the word Science? That, like some magic spell,
it needs only be uttered and the British mind at once
collapses; its reason is suspended. Whether, after the
tremendous exposure of the tortures perpetrated by men of
science; their avowed recklessness of animal suffering; their
obstinate neglect of anaesthetics; their false claims of the
discoveries of Galvani, Harvey, Jenner, &c.,-discoveries
partly originating in accident, partly in observations; and the
testimony of so many of the most eminent men of their own
scientific class that Vivisection is a scandal and a delusion,
whether, I say, England will voluntarily step from its high
position as the Captain of the nations in the field of humanity,
and inaugurate a new period in its history by establishing
torture by Act of Parliament? God Almighty forbid!
Dietenheim, Tyrol.
WILLIAM HOWITT.

Reviews and Notices of New Books.

THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OF THE SACRIFICE AND PARTICI-
PATION OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. Second Edition,
revised and enlarged. By George Trevor, M.A., D.D.,
Canon of York; Rector of Beeford. London: James
Parker and Co. 1876.

TH

66

HE present is an age of shams. From "Old Catholicism" and Whig 'Liberalism" down to Abyssinian gold and yellow hair-dye, the nineteenth century rejoices in shams. But there is, thanks to the Divine principle within us, something-in spite of the Lutheran and Protestant decree that our nature is altogether evil and given over to the father of lies-which is perpetually struggling against fictions, whether religious, political, or social. Still, as an age, it is one of shams.

Against the shams of Zwinglian and Calvinistic attemptsamongst our Anglican clergy as elsewhere-to delude their followers into belief in "real absence" whilst professing, in the language of Scripture, a "real Presence" of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, a deep and powerful reaction has taken place and spread throughout England. Archdeacon Wilberforce in his Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, led the way; Dr. Pusey and Archdeacon Denison followed; and at the present day Anglican

We have been led to make these desultory reflections by the perusal of what we are bound to term the elaborate religious sham before us. The substance of Canon Trevor's crotchets on the Holy Eucharist was originally published (1869) under a somewhat less pretentious title, viz., “The Sacrifice and Participation of the Holy Eucharist." We can only presume that the additional The Catholic Doctrine" has been exccgitated on that principle of homage to Truth to which we have alluded above. But zealous for the good old Anglicanism of his early days he comes, under the guise of Catholic phraseology, to the rescue of the "real absence" sham.

66

The title is a simple misnomer. The principles which the Canon sets forth so elaborately, and with so much apparent regard for " Holy Scripture, the Councils, Liturgies and Fathers, with the Liturgy and standard Divines of the Church of England" (p. 14) are not merely a simple parody of Catholic Doctrine, but they border closely upon, if they do not, in reality, go beyond, the confines of the wilderness of heresy.

Able, as some of Canon Trevor's writings prove him to be, as an historian of India and its missions, of Russia ancient and modern, of ancient Egypt, and of Egypt from the conquest of Alexandra, or of Rome from the fall of the Westupon all of which interesting subjects he has instructed the English-reading public; we feel constrained to record our conscientious opinion that he is not exactly—and probably never will be-a Thomas of Aquin, nor a Scotus, nor even a decent disciple of either. Some men are born poets, other men theologians. Canon Trevor was not born a theologian,

nor has forty years' exercise of the sacerdotal office done anything to supply the defects of nature; for he is muddled in thought and thoroughly unsystematic in manner.

His book before us, which consists of 500 closely-printed pages, is little more than a laboured attempt to develope, and to back-up by a whole library of quotations and references, the singular and altogether novel crochets of the late Archdeacon Freeman, which first appeared in 1855, in a volume entitled The Principles of Divine Service. The special idiosyncrasy of the Archdeacon on the subject of the Eucharist was, as some of our readers will remember, a theory which speedily became known as "The Dead Christ Theory," i.e., as expressed anew by Canon Trevor:-"That the Blessed Sacrament represents not the living Body of our dear Lord in glory, but the Body slain and His Blood shed in sacrifice on the Cross" (p. 3) which statement, however, might pass, did it mean only what Catholic Theology teaches, that the Sacrifice of the Altar is the Memorial, and therefore the Representation, of the Sacrifice of the Cross. But Canon Trevor means much more by it than this. He says, (p. 142) On the cross Christ offered is Human Nature as the one bread and wine, the appointed symbols of that Crucified Sacrifice for all human sin; in the Eucharist an oblation of Body and Blood, is presented on the altar to show the Lord's Death till He come.' They are then received from the Holy Table, consecrated into the real Communion of that which they represent." Thus, as is more distinctly gathered from a general study of the somewhat unscientific and verbose statements in which the work excels, the Consecration serves merely to exhibit the Dead Christ under the forms of Bread and Wine; the glorified Body and Blood becoming present only in, through and by, the act of Communion.

66

Now the Catholic Doctrine of the Eucharist is simply, that after Consecration our Blessed Lord, very God and very Man, is truly, really and substantially, present under the forms of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Altar. Christ thus becomes present by Consecration. But if the theory of Archdeacon Freeman and his disciple be true, then both East and West are, and have been all along, wrong. The modesty of two gentlemen who, under the term of Catholic Doctrine, can insinuate such a statement, is indeed a startling instance of Athanasius contra mundum.

« PreviousContinue »