Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

some proceedings of Bishop Porteus fifty years ago. What those proceedings were I have not had the means of ascertaining; but if I admit, for the sake of argument, that all that Bishop Porteus proposed to the Society was right and possible to be done, but that he could not, in 1783, persuade the Committee of the Society, after four hours' debate, to concur with him—what, I ask, has this to do with the present management of the Society's trust estate ? Mr. R. may if he pleases, and if he thinks it just, abuse men who are no longer alive to defend their motives and conduct;-if he and the Christian Observer choose to wage war with the dead, they may for the present have the field to themselves; they may charge the Committee of 1783 with supineness, with ignorance, with stupidity, but let them beware how they entangle in their operations the living worthies of our time ; let them not dare to insinuate, that all that Bishop Porteus attempted has not been more than achieved by his successors. For ought that I know, the present flourishing condition of the estate may be the result of those very efforts, which the good Bishop deemed to have been made in vain. Few men, who sow the seed of great designs, live themselves to reap the fruit of their hallowed toils. Little more now remains to be said. I trust I have proved the Christian Observer to have been guilty of ignorance and partiality of no ordinary character, and that I have vindicated the Society from the charge, either of mismanaging their property or being ashamed of their proceedings. Annual Reports of Societies must always be unsatisfactory if the reader expects, from a single Report, to know all that a Society has done during a long and diversified scene of operation. Mr. Riland ought, however, in justice to have made himself better informed; and the Observer ought not to have taken advantage of Mr. Riland's ignorance, to attack, in one of the most popular religious journals, a Society like that for the Propagation of the Gospel, and to implicate the Archbishops and Bishops of our Church in what he is pleased to term “ the guilt of being slaveholders.” Mr. Riland, however, is not so ignorant as he pretends to be when he mildly observes, that the sources from which Messrs. Daniel and Trattle bave paid in 3,5421. to the Society's account, is not recorded. From what does the value of a sugar estate arise but the sale of sugar? Mr. R. knows well enough that the produce of an estate arises from the toil of slaves, and he might have seen on the other side of the account, if he had pleased, the amount of bills drawn for the expenses of the estate; how large a portion of which is actually expended upon the slaves, he must be well enough versed in West India transactions to know; or if he does not, he has no pretension to write a novel founded upon fact, and to give to it the title of " Memoirs of a West India Planter.” Mr. Riland, and with him the Christian Observer, in an affected tone of pity, which has the appearance of contempt, remarks that “the Society has been always under a cloud.” What the cloud is they do not inform us; but the real case is, that it is not the Society, but Mr. R. and his friends, who are under the cloud--the cloud of ignorance and of prejudice-that cloud which the friends of the Society are now labouring so earnestly to dissipate, by making the public at large fully acquainted with their proceedings and designs. He must be ignorant of the world who perceives not the value of being abused. The schism which now

VOL. X. NO. I.

G

divides the Bible Society would have broke out years ago but for the perpetual attacks of its opponents, which kept its forces united and on the alert. If the writer in the Observer would but repeat for the next six months a series of attacks similar to that which I have endeavoured to repel, I am verily persuaded, that his very charges would give such publicity to the exertions of the Society, as would raise up many friends and cause the funds of the Society to go on increasing more than in proportion to the frequency of the attacks. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel courts investigation into all her proceedings and conduct; and why?—because she has nothing to fear, and every thing to gain by the scrutiny; she has nothing to conceal; for whatever faults she may have, these she is willing to mend. Her Reports are artless—too much so for this wily generation, but here is not a line in them that is not believed to be true; nor is any attempt made to put a false colouring upon transactions, or to represent her labours as more successful than they really are. Her cause is the cause of the Episcopal Church of England; and, like that Church, if she be not wanting to herself, she will, by God's blessing, triumph over opposition both at home and abroad, and spread her tents over the isles of the Gentiles, and fill the " earth with the kpowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. Dec. 1827. I remain, yours, &c.

S. H. P.

MR. HARTE AND THE PARISH OF ST. LUCY, BARBADOS. Mr. Editor. - It is with a feeling of deep and very painful interest, that in common, I believe, with every Christian Englishman who has read your last Number, I have perused the narrative of certain recent occurrences in the Island of Barbados. The statements contained in that melancholy detail appeared to me at first sight to carry with them so little the air of probability, that I was disposed to consider myself as under some misconception. I sat down therefore to a second examination of them, and, I say it with unfeigned sorrow, my last impression is even worse than the first: I question whether the warmest opponent of the West India system has ever made out a case, which, in all its bearings is less creditable to the holders of slaves, than those persons have in this instance furnished against themselves.

The charges against Mr. Harte are, chiefly at least, of a nature so distinct as to admit

, if true, of the most conclusive evidence; and they are at the same time of so grave a description, that without something like proof, no man, who cares for the interests of truth, and justice, and religion, would in common life venture to make them against any Christian minister. Of these charges, however, not only has no proof been adduced, but it is quite clear, from the whole statement, that they have not the shadow of a foundation. The principal grievances, as urged by the Vestry Meeting of April 21, 1827, are, the “ offensive sermon on Easter Sunday," a sermon which, having been since read verbatim by the Bishop, has received his Lordship's entire approbation; and Mr. Harte's disgraceful conduct, whilst administering the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, thereby endeavouring to alienate their slaves from a sense of their duty, by inculcating doctrines of equality inconsistent with their (i.e. the slaves) obedience to their masters, and with the policy of this island.” (C. R. p. 766.) The history of which inculcation, &c. is simply this: “At the last table,” says Mr. H. " which was not filled with the whites, I took care that the vacant space should be occupied by the coloured people ; but the consecrated elements were administered in no instance to the coloured before the whites." (C. R. p. 770.) What would the vestry have done if a coloured or black Christian brother had presumed to appear at one of the earlier tables, and to have kneeled down between a couple of worthies with a whiter complexion? What, I ask with concern, would even Mr. Harte bimself, a clergyman though he be of the Church of England, have in such a case ventured to do? As to the additional Articles of Accusation preferred by the parish vestry, (C. R. p. 772, &c.), if any intelligent person can read them without a strong suspicion that they were concerted merely to support a cause, which the advocates of it felt not to be the best in the world, I would recommend to him the otherwise superfluous labour of looking at Mr. Harte's reply. He will then be satisfied, that the charges are not only unsupported by evidence, but that they have no foundation in fact; and that, however prejudice and passion might have brought the worthy members of the vestry to a sort of belief in the truth of these allegations, their original hostility to Mr. H. must undoubtedly be referred to some other cause.

I profess myself to be as little satisfied with the manner in which this affair has been conducted, as with the charges themselves.

We will suppose, for the sake of argument, that Mr. H. had acted throughout in the way represented by his accusers; what is the course which members of the Church of England, who were anxious only for redress, would naturally adopt? They would meet as quietly as possible, and would draw up a plain statement of their grievances, and present it to the Bishop; having done this, they would wait a short time at least for his Lordship's decision. But what is the course which these persons pursue? In the first place, forth comes the Churchwarden with an advertisement in the Barbados Mercury, earnestly requesting a public meeting of the inhabitants, &c. in four days, and drawn up in terms exceedingly offensive and insulting. (C. R. p. 766.) Among the resolutions passed at this meeting is one which orders that copies of them be sent to his Excellency the Governor, and the Lord Bishop of the diocese, stating moreover, “that the inhabitants of this parish venture to hope that his Lordship” (we suppose the Bishop is meant, not Lord Combermere) “will restore the peace and tranquillity of the parish, by adopting such measures as may in his wisdom seem expedient to relieve them from those insults and injuries of which they complain.” (C. R. p.766.) But what says the previous resolution? It declares, that in a most important particular they have taken the matter into their own hands, expressing "unequivocally their determination to refuse the Rev. W. M. Harte admission into their estates, and to prevent as much as possible all intercourse between him and their slaves:" • and what is the concluding clause of the very resolution which professes to refer the case to the wisdom of the Bishop? a termination of which (viz. insults and injuries) can only be effected by the removal of Mr. Harte, the present incumbent, who has deservedly lost the confidence, respect and regard of every white inhabitant in the parish:"they are willing to defer to the wisdom of his Lordship, provided that the Bishop will adopt their own; but only with that condition. It is not unimportant to observe, that these resolutions were published in the three newspapers of the island. Well: the Bishop professed his readiness to institute an inquiry: had he at once dismissed Mr. Harte, all would have been right; but as to inquiry, that is quite another affair. Accordingly the churchwarden writes, under date of July 4, that the vestry,

" after a full and mature consideration, &c. forbear appealing to the Ecclesiastical Court on the charges which they have to prefer against Mr. H. until he may be condemned or acquitted of certain charges which are intended to be exhibited against him at the next Court of Grand Sessions, and for which purpose the

necessary proceedings will be immediately instituted against him.” (p. 767.)

Next comes a copy of the warrant, dated July 5, and then a goodly array of nine charges, which were published in the Barbados Mercury of July 31, and most probably in the other papers of the island. The case has been heard before two magistrates, who concurred in dismissing it. You tell us, Sir, that the parish threaten to bring the question before two other magistrates; this then, I suppose, is West India law.

Now, Sir, that Mr. H. may have " lost the confidence, respect and regard of every white inhabitant of the parish," as the vestry affirm, appears to be highly probable; but if he had lost it on the grounds alleged, is this the course which the vestry would have pursued ? I fear many who read this statement, will think that the charges in question do not supply the real cause of their hostility, but that they indicate a hostile spirit previously existing, and for which no public reason has been assigned. If I mistake not, the following observations will throw some light upon the subject.

Among other documents given in the C. R. of the last month, is a letter from an individual who is attorney, it seems, to the Rev. Mr. Brome, a clergyman, who is said to be now in England. In that letter I find the following passage : " Any one who reads your publication (Mr. Harte's), would imagine that I gave no encouragement to the religious instruction of the slaves. Now be it known, that upon every estate for which I am attorney, religious instruction is daily afforded the young negroes, and the said estates are all open to the catechists, excepting those in your parish. The conversion of the slaves, is a measure on which all planters are now actively engaged : for although you would wish to make it appear we are knaves, we are not altogether fools, and we well know that a Christian slave is more docile, tractable and valuable, than a licentious heathen slave.” (C. R. 777.) Very good words these !—but permit me to ask how far they are borne out by facts ? and I will confine myself entirely to your last Number. Is it true then, that the various attempts on the part of the Rector to promote the religious instruction of the slaves, as stated in pp. 768, 769, 770, are correctly detailed ? Is it true that these several plans were abandoned in succession on account of the discouragements, sometimes amounting to public insults, experienced from the whites ? Is it true that the attempt to suppress Sunday dances, with the view of promoting attention to religious instruction, was met in the manner described, and that the catechist was from that time refused admission into the plantation of the Rev. Mr. Brome himself, that same plantation of which the zealous letter-writer cited above is the attorney? Is it a fact that John Matthews, overseer of Bourbon Plantation, acting under the order of Mr. Hinds (p. 780), forbade the whole of the slaves on that property from going to church at all, and that too wben neither Mr. Harte nor his catechist were allowed to attend the estate? Is Mr. Harte under some mental hallucination, when he speaks of the disrespect cast upon the ordinances of the church, as shown in the fact of his not being permitted, on the estate of the Rev. Mr. Brome, to perform the rites of interment over a Christian slave, and of his application being treated by the manager with contempt? or are we to attach no credit to the statement, that since the passing of the resolutions of April 21, not only has the Sunday schools for slaves been discontinued, but the negroes have, with very few exceptions, never been seen at church? I suppose that these questions admit of only such answers as must immediately occur to every reader of your pages. Mr. Harte appears to have been for a time sufficiently popular with his parishioners; to what date are we to refer the change in their sentiments and feelings? precisely to that, in which he entered with zeal upon the instruction of the slaves ? I much fear that this is the impression which the statement before us must excite; that this is the conclusion to which a stranger would naturally come ; most contrary I hope to fact, but that as the case is reported he can hardly avoid it. Must not, then, Mr. Brome's attorney be heard with some reservation, when he expatiates upon the ardour and activity of the planters for the religious instruction and conversion of their slaves ? And must we not infer, that if Mr. Harte had shewn himself less earnest on these points, he would probably have been permitted to live in peace ?

I am aware, Sir, that the conclusion at which I have arrived may seem to be deduced from the conduct of a few individual managers and attorneys: I confirm it, then, by a direct appeal to the recorded words of the parish vestry of St. Lucy, April 21, Resolution third. After declaring that any attempts proceeding from the ministers of religion, to destroy the distinctions, &c. must tend to endanger the safety of the white inhabitants, &c., what is the practical hint with which they conclude the resolution ? that the designs and motives of such persons are to be viewed with jealousy? No: or “that unhappily such things tend to excite in the proprietors a jealousy, often perhaps unjust, against Christian teachers generally? No: but that these attempts are injurious in exciting .... in the proprietors a JUST jealousy against the DESIGNS and MOTIVES of those who are appointed to the office of the religious instruction of the slaves!” The words necessarily apply to the clergymen of the Church of England, who are thus appointed, and to all of them without exception.

The question, therefore, Mr. Editor, is really what you have stated it to be ; viz. whether a clergyman may or may not henceforward go on in the conscientious discharge of his duty, as laid down in the rubrics and liturgy of his church, and looking only to the Bishop as the legitimate judge of his conduct. If the system attempted by the

« ForrigeFortsæt »