The result of his resolution was, that the "foundation," as it is called, became extinct; for having set the example of repugnance to the regulation of the founder, no one else chose to accept the government of the college, and the revenues went back to the heirs at law of the person who had founded it.

Mr.

In 1806, Mr. Philpotts appeared in print as the antagonist of the noted and very unscrupulous Doctor Lingard, who had violently assailed the Bishop of Durham (Shute Barrington) in consequence of a charge which that learned prelate had delivered. Philpotts was at that time one of the chaplains of the bishop, and continued to be so while the bishop lived. This was esteemed an honourable distinction, for Doctor Barrington was particular in the selection of his chaplains, and several of them have proved eminent men in the church.

Subsequently to this, Mr. Philpotts had the regular charge of a parish in Durham city, and was a prebendary of its cathedral. To this office he was appointed in 1809, and continued in Durham till 1819 or 1820, when he became rector of Stanhope, one of the richest livings in England, and equal in its revenues to some of the bishoprics, before they had passed through the equalizing hands of the Ecclesiastical Commission. It is said that this rich living did not prove a source of much riches to Mr. Philpotts, in consequence of his being under an engagement to the patron to build a mansion upon it, suitable to its income at the time Mr. Philpotts obtained it; and just about that time, or shortly after, a great depreciation took place in the price of lead, from the tithes of which a large share of the revenues of the parish was derived, and consequently the income of the living was abridged. It was while rector of Stanhope that Doctor Philpotts became known to the public as a writer upon those controversial points which were then so closely connected with party politics. The nerve, precision, and vivacity of his style soon attracted attention, and he has ever since been a prominent man in the public view.

It is now, I believe, some seventeen years since he published his first volume of letters to the late Charles

Butler, of Lincoln's Inn, in reply to that gentleman's "Book of the Roman Catholic Church." Charles Butler was an honourable antagonist. He was a sincere Roman Catholic, a man of study, and of refined sentiment. He was one who, if he had lived, and retained his faculties to these days, would no doubt have held himself far above the perfidious radicalism of the coarse agitators, who no sooner obtained power than they treated with rude scorn the implied conditions on which the admission to power had been granted. The letters to Mr. Butler included strictures on publications of Dr. Milner and Dr. Lingard, and on the evidence of Dr. Doyle (J. K. L.) before the committees of the Houses of Lords and Commons, on the state of Ireland, which sat in 1824 and 1825. The letters were so able as to engage the attention of the highest persons in the kingdom, including, as is generally understood, the prime minister, the Earl of Liverpool. The criticisms of these letters chiefly related to the theological question involved in the controversy between Romanists and Protestants, and the style of them was characterised by a decorous severity, which was then more the fashion in controversies of the kind than it has been since. They who remember the style of the late Dr. Phelan, fellow of Dublin College, who was engaged in similar controversies about the same time, will recollect that, with all the dignity and polish of his composition, there was mingled a tone of sarcastic enmity, which a certain change of manners since then has to a great degree obliterated. However, the criticisms of Dr. Philpotts, though severe, were so able, that even Mr. Butler himself was desirous of his acquaintance, which he obtained through the introduction of a mutual friend.

From this time, Dr. Philpotts was looked upon as a leading champion of that which was, in those days, upheld with so much warmth as the "Protestant cause." I say, in those days; for in our time "Protestant" has been discovered to be a too general term, including all, whether churchmen or not, who are opposed to the Church of Rome; and learned theologians are more apt to speak of the cause of the church than the cause of Protestantism. The wonderfully powerful letters of

Dr. Philpotts to Mr. Canning, in 1827, carried his reputation as a Protestant advocate to the very highest pitch, and, indeed, led to a misconception of his views, which was afterwards the cause of his being subjected to a torrent of obloquy, more bitter than any other man of his profession has had to en

counter.

They who remember the events of 1829, and a few subsequent years, can easily call to mind the bitterness of reproach with which Dr. Philpotts was assailed in many quarters as a recreant to the cause which he had so ably supported. It became known, by some means or other, that he was one of those whom the Duke of Wellington had consulted, and it was inferred that the measure of the duke's cabinet had the approbation of Dr. Philpotts, if not something more.

He

The truth was, that all along, upon the political part of the emancipation question, Dr. Philpotts had held different opinions from those who were utterly opposed to that measure. thought that, with certain securities and limitations, it was politic to grant emancipation. So far back as 1813, he had had the boldness to oppose the Bishop of Durham, whose chaplain he was, upon that question, or at all events to differ from him; and at a meeting of the clergy of his lordship's diocese, he prevailed upon them to admit such amendments in their petition as left open the question of securities. There is little reason to doubt, that when consulted by the Duke of Wellington, he entered into the views of the illustrious minister, contingently upon the adoption of securities, which (unfortunately, as it now seems) were not adopted. But violent party men knew nothing about this; and the virulent Radicals, always glad of a fling at a churchman, did not cease to assail him in public as a renegade, who had risen into notice by the assertion of opinions, which he had abandoned to gain the favour of the Duke of Wellington. Dr. Philpotts might have met this taunt of bitterness by a disclosure of the real circumstances of the case; but it has subsequently appeared that he did not feel himself at liberty to disclose what had taken place in confidence between him and the prime minister. It was not till 1882, when assailed by the Earl of

Radnor, in that strain of attack which is common to coarse Radical newspapers, and to his lordship, that Dr. Philpotts, then in the House of Lords as Bishop of Exeter, called on the Duke of Wellington himself, as a witness that he had not supported the measure of 1829, but opposed it as being without those securities which he (the bishop) deemed necessary for the security of the Established Church. The duke answered the appeal with his usual frankness, and spoke of his astonishment at the injustice which had been done the right reverend prelate, and the length of time during which that injustice had been perseveringly maintained. This ought to have been enough, but such is the effect of calumny, that I am not sure even now that many of those who gave ear to the reproaches against Dr. Philpotts, do not still cherish the enmity which was then sown.

The attentive reader of the famous letters to Canning may discover in them that the writer was not an ultra anti-emancipationist, though that was the light in which, owing to the violent spirit of the time, he was then contemplated. The first of these letters I cannot now lay my hand upon, but the second is before me, and it is no wonder that a performance of such power and brilliancy should have had a tremendous effect upon the sensitive minister. The first of these pamphlets had been used against Mr. Canning by Sir John Copley, since Lord Lyndhurst, in a debate which took place not long before the fatal illness of Lord Liverpool. This put Canning in such a rage that he burst out into personal invective against Sir J. Copley, then master of the rolls, and was not reconciled to him until, being made prime minister, he required the assistance of Sir J. Copley's great abilities in the cabinet, as lord chancellor.

But it was after Mr. Canning was made prime minister, and, out of respect to the conscience of the king, as he said, had abandoned the very measure which a short time before he represented to be so vitally necessary, that the second letter of Dr. Philpotts was launched forth against him ; a letter which I take to be the most cutting and withering piece of sarcastic writing that has been directed against any man since the days of

of truth, but the light it sheds is like that of which Virgil sings—

"sub luce maligna

Est iter in silvis."

The sense of truth which we derive from it, is accompanied with a sense of pain.

It was a strange thing that Canning -the literary man-the orator-the accomplished scholar of his day, among politicians should have been actually dragged down to dusty death by the severe attacks of scholars and of orators. This pamphlet of Dr. Philpotts, from which I have been quoting, and which, from beginning to end, is like a shower of arrows, is dated the 7th May, 1827, and on the 11th of the same month, Lord Grey spoke the famous speech in the House of Lords, the lofty scorn of which sank as iron into the soul of Canning. He was a man to feel every blow which was struck at him by men of ability, and to be shaken by every tug of genius which was made to pull him down; and down he came ere long, like a felled tree

Junius. Mark the very first sentence -its polish and its sting. "Sir," says the writer, "it is so highly interesting to Protestants to know the exact position which their cause now holdsand the influence which your opinions and conduct must have upon it is obviously so important that I shall offer no apology for endeavouring to ascertain what is the last determination which you have formed upon this subject." He proceeds in the same strain, showing in the most masterly manner how Canning had been, in the commencement of his career, a cautious emancipator, such as the writer approved; how he had then become a violent, unconditional emancipator of the ultra-liberal school; and then, when he became prime minister, had reverted to his first prudence, and turned his back upon all his own arguments of a recent date. "I admire," says Dr. Philpotts, "not that your uncommon vigour of intellect should improve every passing event, and turn it to the best account-not that you should grow wiser as you grow older, but that you should grow so very much wiser in so very short a space of time-above all, that you should, apparently without any effort, attain at once to that highest point of human wisdom, the power of knowing and acknowledging that you have been in error; the capacity, in short, of eating up, at a single mouthful, every unwise or mischievous sentiment you may have expressed on a great question of national policy during half of your political life —and, after the most grievous and the wildest aberrations, should return to the very point of sober discretion from which you started fifteen years ago. This it is which chiefly excites my admiration, and which, in my humble opinion, places you quite alone among statesmen-far above all comparison with any of the vulgar herd of politicians of whom I have ever read or heard."

No one will dispute the great ability of this sarcastic mode of writing, but it will be relished or disliked according to different tastes and temperaments. I own that for myself I think grave and austere sarcasm a weapon that ought to be sparingly used. It may serve to show us the way through the mazy paths of error to the centre-point

Dr. Philpotts and Lord Grey, opposed as they have been since, were certainly main instruments to one end in 1827, namely, the smiting down of Canning, by attacks which he was unable to answer, and too sensitive to endure.

In 1831, Dr. Philpotts took his seat in the House of Lords as Bishop of Exeter. He was to have held the living of Stanhope in commendam with the bishopric, but the Whigs having come into the administration before the arrangements were completed, they took advantage of the circumstance, and presented another to the living, so that in point of income it was understood that the bishop lost by his promotion. From the outset of his parliamentary career, the bishop has been distinguished for warmth and vehemence on the side of ardent and

generous views. He has been utterly opposed to the prevailing prudence of the day. Sometimes, as I have before hinted, he has been unguarded in his reliance upon statements which were

inaccurate or questionable, but, as Goldsmith said of the "failings" of his clerical hero, we may say of the bishop in his public career, that even his errors lean to virtue's side.

His first-or among the first of his strenuous efforts in the House of Lords, was against the modern national education plan in Ireland. He called it an exclusion of the Bible-a denial of the Holy Scriptures to the persons who are taught in the national schools. He manifestly looked upon it as a base and unholy compromise with the enemies of truth; and, alluding to the king's commission, under which these things were done, he quoted the words of Samuel to Saul, "Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, He also hath rejected thee from being King over Israel." Now I know very well that there are amiable, and excellent, and Christian men, who think quite differently about this matter, and cannot understand how any one who desires to speak the truth, should speak in this way of schools where selections from the Scriptures are constantly read, or appointed to be read; but they are men of comparatively cold temperament, whom nothing would rouse into enthusiasm, and who examine a question involving sentiment and feeling, reverence and affection, as they would a problem in arithmetic. It is in vain that we expect judgments to agree, when temperaments are so opposite. Judgments are formed upon facts; and facts seem different things to different men. For my part, I incline to those whose perceptions are influenced by warmth of feeling.

It requires some personal recollection of the period which immediately succeeded that of the bishop taking his seat in the House of Lords, to estimate the trials to which men in his station were put at that time. So dreadful had been the violence of the "reform" fever ;-so little hope was there that a representative assembly, elected under the system of the reform act, could be any thing else than ultra democratic, many of the most thoughtful men in the kingdom believed that every establishment was doomed. The church and the aristocracy were every day the objects of the most outra

that

geous calumny, even in the journals which were directly patronized by the Whig government. The demolition of the House of Lords, as a house of mischief, and a national nuisance, was constantly advocated. The insolence of revolutionists knew no bounds, and it was scarcely expected, on any side, that the tide of destruction should cease until all had been overwhelmed.

It was in this state of the public mind that the Irish Church temporalities' bill was proposed a bill which, as Mr. O'Connell has since boasted, "bowled down the bishops of the Irish establishment like nine-pins." There were but a hundred and fifty Conservatives in the House of Commons, and no resistance could be effectually made to the bill there. In the upper house it might have been resisted; but, among prudent men, there was a dread of the possible consequences, and the bill, with I think one important modification, was allowed to pass. The Bishop of Exeter was utterly opposed to this policy; not that he denied the danger, but he thought it better to brave it. considered that to allow such a bill, was but a short postponement of the coming ruin; and I have heard that he used the expression in private, that it was the most honourable ditch in which the House of Lords could die. For himself, he strenuously opposed it; and if the carrying of that bill were a great national sin, as some think, the Bishop of Exeter, at least, has a clear conscience on that score.

He

Even more vehement than his opposition to that bill was his opposition to the new poor law, which had the support of the Duke of Wellington and the Bishop of London. His language in opposition to the poor-law measure, certainly went as far as the most zealous feeling could prompt, and perhaps a little further than ecclesiastical moderation could warrant. But surely, if there be at any time an excuse for more than ordinary warmth, it is when a Christian man thinks he sees the cause of the poor treated with a cold, calculating prudence, which looks to the cost, rather than to the cause, and sacrifices all noble feeling at the shrine of thrift.

I think I have now said enough to give the readers of this sketch some

thing like a fair conception of the character of the Bishop of Exeter, as a public man. As an ecclesiastic, I believe all parties allow that his abilities are great, and his conduct irreproachable. With respect to the controversies which have occasioned so much stir in the church, of late years, I understand him to have taken a middle part. He strongly objects to those extremes of practice, and those subtleties of exposition, which look like an approach to the feeling and practice of the Church of Rome; but he rejoices in the revival of greater attention to the ritual and discipline of the Church of England. He does not like explanations which seem to run away with the plain meaning of

what is in the prayer-book; but he gladly sees the doctrine and discipline contained and commanded in that book, more diligently followed than they were some years ago. He is not one who is ashamed of being designated a Protestant, but he is one who claims to be a member and a bishop of the catholic church. Knowing and estimating the value of church authority and ecclesiastical discipline, he yet casts no longing, lingering look to Rome, but stands firm in his position, as one of the chosen and consecrated heads of the Church of England.

This I humbly submit as my estimate of the ecclesiastical character of the Bishop of Exeter; and so I bid him, very heartily, farewell!

WHAT know you, reader, of the Azores save what sweets you may have extracted from out the rind of a St. Michael's orange? What acquaintance have you got with that interesting group of the nine volcanic islets of Fayal, Tercera, Pico, Santa Maria, St. Georges, Graciosa, Flores, and Corvo, that raise their high and rocky heads nearly in the midst of that great world of waters that rolls between the continents of Europe, Africa, and America? Little we believe beyond their names, if so much; but certainly nothing of their inhabitants, manners, climate, scenery, government or domestic usages that could induce you thither in those days of steam and yachting in search of health, gain, or amusement. The way is long-the sea is rough, and the accommodation, we fear, unpromising to those not in the habit of roughing it in a Cowes schooner upon salt junk, mouldy biscuit, and trihoral shower baths. But nevertheless we can enjoy not only the voyage, but the many other privations which a residence in those neglected

countries necessarily subjects their European sojourners to, by wandering through the pages of two very interesting and useful volumes just brought out by the Messrs. Bullard, as we partake of the social comforts of a drawingroom ottoman, or linger in the calm solitude of an outdoor evening's walk. This work is a transcript of the journal of an invalid and his companion who spent the winter of '38 and the ensuing summer in search of health and recreation among those Western islands, in visiting the baths of the Furnas, or boiling springs, and other remarkable and interesting national phenomena of this archipelago.

Without, however, possessing much literary worth, or any novelties in natural history or geology that might recommend them to the world of science; being moreover rather voluminous in ink and paper for their materiel, and a leetle too much of quotation-yet still as they possess many lively sketches, some graphic descriptions of the people, and do not weary one by the usual detail of personal mishaps and dis