The

this proposed explanation is most unfortunate, as the legislature never contemplated excluding any sectarians from the church. In the Elizabethan age, the church was far too powerful and despotic to be approached even at a distance by any sectarian. It was not a question then of exclusion, but of toleration. legislature required the priests of the state to subscribe the articles, that all others who did not worship and believe according to the creed of the priests might be persecuted, repressed, and compelled to submit. In these days, the articles may serve to keep sectarians out of the church; but in the Elizabethan age, they were rather worded as a pattern of belief, by which to drive all recusants into the church. Dr. Paley's modern ideas of defending the establishment were utterly unknown in the sixteenth century. In those days the church had no other thoughts than to subdue all opposition in every quarter, and to rule in all the land with unquestioned and absolute uniformity of an obedient faith.

Dr. Paley, however, has, in his chapter on subscription to the articles, prudently omitted the still more stringent subscription to the Prayer Book, which the legislature enjoined, and from the meaning of which, it would be impossible to invent any evasion. "I,

do hereby declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all, and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the book intituled the Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England; together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, printed as they are to be sung or said in churches; and the form or manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons."

The intolerable burthen of this declaration on the consciences of many clergymen, has produced effects in many places which we all have witnessed; but it never can be ascertained, till the day when all secrets shall be revealed, how many unhappy functionaries of the establishment have lived and died under a poignant sense of guilt, into which this iniquitous declaration has tempted or entrapped them. Some clergymen, more perhaps to be pitied than any others, have endeavoured to get rid of the sin, by openly declaring that they withdraw

their assent, without, however, resigning that preferment which they received in consequence of their assent. Such instances have been known, as in the case of Dr. John Sherman, rector of Bradwell, who thus recanted his subscription :

"Whereas I have sometime heretofore openly in this place, declared before you, my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in, and by the Book of Common Prayer, I do acknowledge myself to have acted rashly and inconsiderately in so doing; and do therefore here before you all, declare my unfeigned renouncing and recanting of that my former declared assent and consent, to all and every thing prescribed in that book; because though I still highly approve of that book for a great part thereof, and shall continue to use it, both openly in the church, and privately in my family, and to conform to most of its rites and ceremonies, yet upon second thoughts I have found something contained and prescribed in that book, to which I cannot assent and consent, some things being very offensive and dangerous, others untrue and sinful. Besides that it seems to me an honour too high for any but the book of God, the sacred Scriptures, to have unfeigned assent and consent given to all and every thing contained and prescribed therein, as if any human writing, especially of such bulk and variety of contents as this, might be presumed to be without error and mistake throughout, in every particular matter and thing thereof."

The recantation is well worded, but we do not hear that it was followed by a renunciation of those secular benefits which the "unfeigned assent and consent" procured for Dr. Sherman.

In concluding these remarks, it should be observed, that no person can be ordained or admitted into the clerical order of the establishment, except he first subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles. He must also subscribe the three following Articles.

1. "That the Queen's majesty, under God, is the only supreme governour of this realm, and of all other her majesty's dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal; and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath, or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority,

2. "That the book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God, and that it may be lawfully used, and that he himself will use the form of the said book prescribed in public prayer, and administration of the sacraments, and none other.

3. "That he alloweth the Book of Articles of Religion (the Thirty-nine Articles), agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy in the convocation, holden at London in the year 1562, and that he acknowledgeth all and every the articles therein contained, being in number thirty-nine, besides the ratification, to be agreeable to the Word of God.

"And for the avoiding of all ambiguities, such persons shall subscribe in this form and order, setting down both his christian and surname. "I do willingly, and ex animo, subscribe to these three articles above mentioned, and to all things contained in them."

HINDOOSTAN.-OATHS OF NATIVE

WITNESSES.

Act of Council of the British Government in India. Fort William. October, 1839.

"AN Act for the examination of Native witnesses.

"1. Whereas obstruction to justice has arisen, owing to the unwillingness of Native witnesses to give testimony in consequence of their being compelled to be sworn upon the Koran, or by the water of the Ganges, or according to other forms which are repugnant to their conscience or feelings; it is hereby enacted, that no Native witness shall be compellable in any court of justice to make oath or declaration otherwise than according to the following effect:"I solemnly affirm and declare in the presence of Almighty God, that I will faithfully and without partiality answer make to all such questions as shall be demanded of me, touching the matter now before the Court, which shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing

but the truth.'

"2. And it is hereby provided, that if any person making such affirmation or declaration shall be convicted of having wilfully and falsely affirmed or declared any matter or thing which if it had been sworn previously to the passing of this Act would have amounted to wilful perjury, every such offender shall be subject to the same pains, penalties, and forfeitures to which persons convicted of wilful perjury were subject before the passing of this Act."

It is curious to find that "the consciences" of the Mahometans and Brahmins are relieved by the Government in India, whilst on the subject of oathtaking the English legislature allows no such relief to Englishmen unless they are Quakers or Ex-Quakers. An Englishman in England who might entertain scruples of conscience about taking an oath, unless he either belonged or had belonged to the Society of Friends, would be in a situation to suffer many great injuries, and, indeed, might be incarcerated sine die for declining to be sworn in the usual juridical form as a witness.

It would appear, moreover, by the above Act, that the Natives of India consider the Koran and the waters of the Ganges more holy than the Almighty; and this, indeed, is the usual working of false religion, that it tends to give honor to the creature above the Creator, who is blessed for ever.

PERSECUTION OF THE JEWS IN SYRIA.

A REMARKABLE movement has taken place amongst the Jews. In consequence of the persecution which has lately been practised against their brethren in Syria, the Jews residing in France and England have united for the purpose of endeavouring to relieve their brethren in the East from the sufferings to which they have been subjected, and, if possible, to obtain protection against such inflictions for the future. The Jews in France set the example, but the French Government refused to interfere. In this country, a few influential gentlemen who had for some time previously been acting in concert for Hebrew emancipation, calling themselves "The Deputies of the British Jews," had a meeting at the house of Sir Moses Montefiore. At this meeting it

was resolved that an application should be made to Government to assist them in the affair. To those who waited on Lord John Russell with this view, his Lordship replied, by asking who had authorised them, and whether they had been appointed to their office and duly recognised by any public meeting; and this question being answered in the negative, his Lordship refused to hold any further communication with them on the subject. To obviate this defect, the Deputies called a preliminary meeting at the New Synagogue in Great St. Helen's, at which it was decided to call a general meeting; which was accordingly held in the Great Synagogue, Duke's-place, on Tuesday, the 23rd June.

After the evening service had been read, Sir Moses Montefiore, the President of the London Committee of Deputies of British Jews, was, on the motion of Mr. H. H. Cohen, Warden, President of the Great Synagogue, called to the chair.

The Chairman said that this meeting had been convened to consider the best means of delivering the Jews of Damascus, in pursuance of a resolution passed at a former meeting, the proceedings of which would be read by the secretary. He (the Chairman) would not trouble the meeting with any remarks, but merely ask the attention of those present to those resolutions.

The Honorary Secretary (Mr. Sampson Samuel) then read the report of the previous meeting. The report stated that

"The London committee of deputies of the British Jews had received from Egypt and Syria documents showing that the base and infamous accusations raised againts the Jews of Damascus were sought to be established by false evidence, and by declarations of guilt elicited by torture, and descriptive of their present sufferings. That the Jewish community of London had therefore been called together, in order that they might be informed of the present position of their brethren in the east, and the means proposed to be adopted to protect the accused against the false and foul charges brought against them. That letters had been received from Damascus, Alexandria, and Jerusalem, evincing that throughout the whole of Syria the Jews were in great terror lest the consequences of these horrible accusations should lead to their persecution everywhere,

and that the accused persons now imprisoned at Damascus should be executed as condemned criminals, unless a revision of their sentence of condemnation were obtained from the Viceroy of Egypt, and the case be reheard before an unprejudiced tribunal, and competent persons be allowed to defend the accused. The writers of these letters anxiously call on the Jews of Europe to second their endeavours, and yet to save the lives of the prisoners at Damascus, to protect the Jews throughout Asia from the evils which must result from the spreading of such calumnious opinions, and to rescue the Jewish religion from the horrible imputation of commanding and approving the shedding of human blood for the purposes of the ceremonies of the passover.

*

*

Mr. Meyer Anselm de Rothschild felt great satisfaction in proposing the first resolution, which was this, "That this meeting do highly approve of the conduct of the board of deputies and others in having so zealously and promptly taken the preliminary steps which appeared to them to be necessary for the defence of the persecuted Jews of Damascus, and fully adopt the resolutions passed by them in furtherance of such objects"—(hear, hear).

Mr. Barnard Van Oven, M.D., in seconding it, said, the subject which has called us together is not one of ordinary importance, any more than the place in which we are met is an ordinary place of meeting. Many of us are accustomed to meet together in matters of charity or on political questions, when we have to debate the best means of lessening the misery of our poorer brethren, or of improving the relative standing and condition of all; and such meetings are properly held in taverns, in vestry-rooms, or in our own parlours; but we are now assembled in the synagogue itself, in the very temple of our faith, on the very spot where we offer up to our Creator our thanks for his past bounties, our prayers for his future protection; and well may we be assembled here, in this holy place, for the question before us this evening is nothing less than this: 'Shall many of our brethren, who are guiltless of any crime-except that of being Jews, and prosperous-de reviled, tortured, and exterminated, upon foul charges, falsely made ?—Shall a flame of persecution, which has been lighted up in the east by avarice, be so fed with bigotry, that it

shall increase, and spread, and go forth like some monster, destroying and to destroy, until the very name of Jew shall be heard only with horror and disgust, and their persons shall sink under cruelty, oppression and contempt?'

*

*

I

know that it is the opinion of many whose judgment I respect, that it is not only unnecessary but unwise to attempt the refutation of the accusation—that it would be an insult to the community, in this case, to publish such a refutation; and I must own that I did incline to that opinion myself; but, when I have since learned that in France-modern enlightened France-the very head-quarters of liberality and science-the governing powers, if they do not openly avow their belief, at any rate refuse to take any active measures showing their disbelief when I learn that their consuls are the most active of our enemies, and that their Government coldly prefers protecting its agents to advocating the cause of humanity when even M. Črémieux himself told us," La France est contre nous,' France is opposed to us-when I find one or two of our English newspapers much more disposed to open their columns to reports against us than to defend our cause, and when one of the most talented editors of a periodical expresses his disbelief in such accusations, merely by saying, "he never intended to mix up the enlightened Jews of England and France with their bigoted brethren of the East"-when I consider these and similar evidences of the credulity of mankind, I do come to the conclusion that this horrible accusation should not only be fully disproved as concerns the persons now accused at Damascus, but that it should be altogether refuted; that our rabbis-all the most celebrated rabbis of Europe-should give in their declarations, on oath, disowning it; that our accusers should be publicly called on to show the books in which such practices are enjoined; and, above all, that attention should be drawn to the histories of past times, when similar accusations were made in most countries for similar purposes. * It is not, then, merely for the sake of humanity-not only for the sake of our oppressed brethren that we are called on to act; it is our own battle that we fight, though, thank heaven, our own country is not the battlefield. We must crush the spirit that is rising in the east, lest it should travel

* *

* * #

*

westward; we must disprove the accusations brought against our religion, lest it be said we cannot do so. We must put an end to the persecution in Asia; and if possible punish the persecutors, lest their success should encourage similar attempts nearer home, where there is enough, and more than enough, to stimulate bigotry and to tempt avarice. France refuses to interfere, and her agents, all influential at this moment in Egypt, are our bitterest enemies. They appeal to us for protection, and the enlightened ruler of Egypt, although he is almost compelled by the reports placed before him to assent to the accusation, appears disposed to accord to the accused a fresh trial-to allow them, contrary, be it observed, to the customs of that country, to be defended by their friends; and he will permit those interested in their defence to come from Europe to defend them. This, on the part of Mehemet Ali, is noble and just behaviour, worthy of a prince who is reported by all who know him to be before his age in knowledge and ability. * * * The Jews of Paris have deputed the highly talented and nobly patriotic M. Crémieux as their representative. It is to be hoped that we shall be represented by our chairman, a gentleman of whom it may be well said, that his repeated visits to those countries, his personal acquaintance with the rulers, his character, rank, and influence, point him out at once as the fittest and ablest man in all England for the office. It must not be supposed that this is a journey of pleasure which these gentlemen are urged to undertake. It is a mission replete with difficulty, and not free from danger. * * * The GoD of ISRAEL, seeing their holy errand, who knoweth the purity of their purpose, will watch over and guard them, will protect their health, shield them from evils, direct their efforts, and lead them to a successful issue; so shall they return to us triumphant, having saved our brothers' lives, and having proved to the whole world that the religion of the Jews is not a religion of blood, but one of kindness, charity, and goodwill. Gentlemen, the meeting of the 15th passed the resolutions which have been printed and circulated; but they deemed it right, in a matter of this great moment, to appeal to all the Jews of this country-to offer each an opportunity of expressing his

* * *

opinion and contributing his mite. It is for these purposes that you have been summoned here, and upon this subject let me say one word only. I say his mite, for let no man's gift be measured by a money standard-the small donation of the poor man will weigh as heavily in the scale of charity as the magnificent gift of him who has been blessed with abundant wealth. Let us have unity and goodwill in this great cause, and let each give what he can spare in furtherance of it."

The resolution was then put from the chair.

Mr. D. Salomons next rose and said"Before that resolution is put, I am anxious to address a few words to this meeting. As I usually take a part in all public matters concerning the Jews, it would be thought most extraordinary if I omitted to do so on the present occasion. With reference to what has been stated in Parliament on the subject, and also to the conduct of a great portion of the public press, I confess that it is calculated to give me the greatest satisfaction, and enables me to draw a pleasing contrast between the dark ages and the period in which we live. Mr. Van Oven has called your attention to the conduct of the French Government as the opposite to that which might reasonably have been expected; I lament that such conduct should have been adopted as that of which Mr. Van Oven so justly complained. I lament it for the interest of France herself, to which it must prove detrimental, for the interest of the Jews, and for the interests of humanity. I think, however, that we ought to separate the conduct of the French Minister from that of the French nation, for I believe that the people of France will respond as joyfully to the feelings of humanity as those of this country. The present meeting is limited in its objects to the class most interested in the subject to be brought under discussion, but nevertheless the proceedings of this meeting will have an effect not only here, but also in that country where I am most anxious they should be heard of as early as possible. With regard to the proceeding of the President of the French Council, I should be glad to see him here to-day, that I might have an opportunity, in the face of the empire, of challenging him, whether he is not ashamed of the mode in which the case was met in the

VOL. III.

***

Per

Chamber of Deputies. However, in calling the attention of the French to the matter, the Jews of France have an advantage which is not possessed by the Jews who are resident in this country. In Paris the affair was brought under the notice of the French Chamber of Deputies by a Jewish member of that assembly, who, in the double character of Jew and Frenchman, asked the Chamber to render aid to his brethren in the time of their trouble. We have heard it stated here that French agency has been at work in bringing the present accusation against the Jews; and when a representation to that effect was made, the President of the Council said, "Oh, this is an attack on a French functionary, and it becomes my duty to defend him.' haps in making this reply, he acted right as a Minister, but as a man it was his duty to have condemned the cruelties that had been practised towards the Jews. I accuse him of a want of humanity in the sight of civilized Europe. I feel a conviction that an appeal from us will have great effect, because the character of our country forms a strong contrast to that of every other. The people of this country are always ready to take part against the oppressor. I am convinced that, on the present occasion, we shall have the support of the British people. Our christian brethren will be desirous of assisting us in improving the condition of mankind all over the world: and that being the object of your mission, I hope, sir, that it will be successful; and I have only to say, in conclusion, may God speed you on your journey.

* *

The resolution was then put, and carried unanimously.

Mr. Isaac Cohen rose to move the second resolution, which was to the effect that Sir Moses Montefiore be requested to communicate these proceedings to her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and entreat him to grant to him (Sir M. Montefiore) such protection as might ensure his personal safety, and such documents as might promote the fulfilment of the object of his mission. "That for the able and eloquent manner in which the cause of the persecuted Jews in Damascus had been introduced into the House of Commons last night by a right honourable baronet, the whole community of Jews owed him their warmest thanks, while the reply of the

*

*