Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

to consider its utility or advantage. This seems to have been the case with the writer in the Quarterly Review, on the subject in question; for, while he has introduced an anecdote, to shew the pleasure which deaf-and-dumb persons sometimes experience from a sensation of musical sounds, evidenced in the case of Mr. Arrowsmith, he has not brought forward a single in stance of his capability of expressing the operations of his mind through the medium of written language, which seems to confirm the opinion expressed above.

I have thus noticed some of the prejudices existing against, I may say, the instruction of the deaf and dumb; for it does not appear that any one has ever been taught the use of language, except in an establishment exclusively devoted to that purpose.

A FRIEND TO THE DEAF AND
DUMB.

We have answered the appeal to our candour," by inserting the foregoing paper, though we think many of its arguments open to refutation. Our own great objection to the management of the deaf-anddumb institutions in this country, and which is not met by our correspondent, is, that their conductors

profess to teach deaf mutes to speak; by which mummery they retain the education of them in a very few hands (far too few to be adequate to the number of these unhappy candidates for instruction), and we think it important that the public should be disabused on this subject. Our correspondent, in arguing for giving to deaf mutes a language, teaching them to read and write, instructing them in religion, &c. cannot but know that ourselves and our former correspondents are as zealous on these points as himself. And is he not aware also, that these objects are perfectly attainable without articulation; and that attempting to teach articulation in the case of the deaf and dumb, impedes rather than forwards the attainment of them? If he is not aware of this, we refer him to the papers in our former volumes, or to the example of the institutions in France and America. If he is, then why defend the practice of those institutions which delude the public on this subject; and this almost as if some beneficial privilege, some private patent right, were infringed by divesting the education of the deaf and dumb of mystery, and seeking to promote it wherever these unhappy outcasts from society are to be found.

REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS.

1. Histoire Véritable des Mômiers de Genève.

2. Precis des Debats.

3. HALDANE's Letter to Chenevière.
4. Dr. P. SMITH'S Vindication.
5. Observations sur les nouveaux
Sectaires.

6. De l'Arrêté du Conseil d'Etat.
7. Des Persecutions Religieuses dans
le Canton de Vaud.

(Concluded from p. 709.)

In the month of December 1823, a letter was addressed by three young ministers of that canton, and subsequently signed by a few others, to the members of the Council of State, intimating their determination to separate from the established church of the country; and requesting permission to constitute places of worship independent of it. The alleged ground was, that the Hel

WE pass on from Geneva to the vetic Confession had been virtually Pays de Vaud.

set aside both by pastors and peo

ple; and that the discipline of the church was annihilated: their plan was to preach according to that confession, and to restore discipline. The great distinction as to principle between this case and that of Geneva, is, that in the present instance, the Helvetic Confession was publicly acknowledged and respected. According to the doctrines of that confession, the pastors actually professed to preach; and as to general views, the chief features of orthodoxy remained among them.

The pamphlet by Dean Monneron, entitled "Observations sur les nouveaux Sectaires," is addressed in reply to the authors of that letter; and, though there are parts of it in which we cannot coincide, we rise from the perusal of it with sentiments of warm respect for the septuagenarian writer of it. What a contrast, in spirit and in purpose, is this gentleman to M. Chenevière! There is, in this aged pastor, so much humility, and kindness of heart, and indulgence to the failings of others, and persuasiyeness of reasoning, and carefulness to speak the truth, and such perfect freedom from mean, and base, and unwarranted insinuations, as to make his publication quite a treat after the diatribes from Geneva. The effect of his letter upon our minds, is to excite a strong wish that, instead of separating from their church, the young ministers to whom he writes had retained their allegiance to it. To their piety he bears the most honourable testimony: whether their judgment in this matter deserves equal commendation, is a question which we cannot answer in the affirmative. There have been times, in our own church, of great doctrinal defection from our Articles in the majority of our clergy; but would this have justified those who retained her principles in seceding from her communion? What would have been the condition of the Anglican Church at the present moment, if, during the last century, every individual who became more in

earnest in religion than his neighbours, had thought this a sufficient reason for withdrawing from the pale of the national church? Where then would have been that cheering revival among us of truly Scriptural and Church-of-England doctrine, and piety of life, which, by the blessing of God, it is our present happines to enjoy?

We are so much accustomed, in this land of civil and religious freedom, to secessions and separations of all sorts, that our first feeling, on observing the request of these young ministers to the Council of State, is that of surprise at the necessity for such an application. We naturally ask, "Why cannot they retire, if such be their wish, and say nothing about it? They do not live in Constantinople or Madrid: in the free States of Switzerland, they know nothing of the doctrine of the bowstring or the stake; and the familiars of the Inquisition have no place in Lausanne.' We are not sure whether it might not be better for these gentlemen, if they had been the subjects of the Grand Seignior, or Ferdinand the Beloved. We will venture to say, that in the annals of the darkest ages, and of the most powerful, as well as most superstitious despotism, we should hardly expect a more insulting domination over the consciences of men, than has been in this instance exhibited by those Republican Grandees, in the plenitude of their wisdom, and the majesty of their thrones, the "très honorès Monsieur le Landamman et Messieurs les Membres du Conseil d'Etat."

How far the ministers of religion stimulated the energies of these very honourable counsellors, we have no distinct evidence before us: if any of them did really lend themselves to the work of persecution, we know, on the contrary, that many have disapproved of it; and we hope that Dean Monneron is of the number.

The Petition to the Council of State is dated December 24, 1823.

The official answer is in the form of an arrêté, bearing date 15th January, 1824: it has all the formalities with which the spirit of intolerance and persecution generally invests itself, and is signed, "Le Landamman en charge, F. Clavel; Le Chancelier, Boisot."

By this instrument, the real character of which can only be adequately comprehended by those who read and examine the whole of it, the ministers and their friends, "of the new sect," as these trés honorés Messieurs lés Membres du Conseil d'Etat very sagaciously define it, are designated as "des Mômiers:" so much for the logic and dignity of these legislators: and it is very summarily decreed, that those who separate themselves from the national church shall not be tolerated; that the justices of peace, &c. are specially charged instantly to dissolve their meetings, and to report their proceedings to the Council of State; that every person who attends these prohibited assemblies, and who has disobeyed the order to leave them, and rendered it necessary to employ force, shall be imprisoned three days, besides the possible infliction of other pains and penalties; that all the individuals, whose measures have tended to gain proselytes, "a une secte contraire a la paix religieuse et à l'ordre public" (beautiful logicians!) shall be fined 600 livres, or imprisoned ten years; the same punishment to be also awarded to him who furnishes a place of meeting, or who has called or directed "une assemblée prohibeé," or who has taken any part whatsoever in quality of a chief or director.

The above decree was accompanied by a circular, dated January 16, 1824, emanating from the same high quarter, addressed to the justices of the peace, municipalities, &c. and conceived in the same spirit with its respectable associate. With an equal regard for their own dignity, and for common sense and justice, these official persons again

talk in this instrument of "la nouvelle secte religieuse, dite des Mômiers," of " ces sectaires," and scold in good set terms against the deranging and demoralising character of the principles which it is the pleasure of that learned and theolo gical body to ascribe to them: "leurs assemblées prétendues religieuses," "leurs principes dangereux;" and call upon all and every one of their loving justices and municipalities to be as vigorous as possible in the execution of their high injunctions. To expose these two documents as they deserve, would be to reprint the whole of the pamphlet extracted from the "Archives du Christianisme," entitled de l'Arrêté, &c.; a masterly appeal, and one which must have not a little disturbed the peace of the counsellors of Lausanne. In the following pages we shall gladly avail ourselves of its statements.

Did ever a grave assembly in the world, before this worshipful council, think of denouncing alleged criminals by a nick-name?" We proscribe the Mummers." And what is their crime? "Oh, it is a new sect." And what is their creed? Have they renounced, and, to make the matter worse, renounced covertly, the Helvetic Confession? "No, they pretend to believe it." And do they not believe it? "We cannot tell; but they are a new sect and Mummers; and they separate from the church; and "ne font aucun cas des exhortations et injonctions qui leur ont été addressées de la part du gouvernement, et méconnaissent le respect et l'obéissance que les citoyens doivent à la loi et à l'autorité." Sad work, we doubt not! For persons to think for themselves in a free republic is "most tolerable,” as says the play-writer," and not to be endured." But in England the law defines the crime: "We do not." But ought not you to do it? "We the members of the council of state think not.”

But what do you mean, when you speak of the measures of persons belonging to the new sect tending

to gain proselytes? Is a minister still remaining in the church, but unhappily called a Mummer, to be subjected to your penalties, if he attempt to gain his hearers to the truth? Or is a minister, out of your church, or any private individual, being likewise branded as a Mummer, to be fined and imprisoned, if hé venture to argue with a neighbour on some point of the Helvetic Confession? Or is a schoolmaster, upon whom a truant boy has fixed your appellation of contempt, to be thus punished for explaining to the recently breeched future Councillors of State, a hard passage in the chapter which they are reading? All these persons are within the letter of your denunciation, and, we suspect, within the spirit of it.

One question more. You denounce all assemblies of the new sect, and every individual who lends a room for the purpose of meeting. Suppose that I am suspected of lending a room in my house; how are you to prove it?" We will break into the house." Indeed! In England, we consider a man's house to be his castle: not so, it seems, in Switzerland. And what is the object of your visits? "To put a stop to the Mummers." A pretty employment, and delicately executed! The justice of peace presents himself, with the arrêté in his hand: he opens the door: he finds a party more or less numerous: he demands what they are doing: if they tell him that they are at play or drinking, vastly good; he retires satisfied: the cards or the bottles testify the purity of their intentions. But if he hear any religious words, or see a Bible open on the table, the meeting is of a suspicious character: he listens attentively; the worthy magistrate, who has till that day probably been an honest farmer, is turned all at once into a professor of divinity; and if he believes himself to hear any ill-sounding doctrine; if, in his judgment, they do not interpret the Epistles of St. Paul according to his taste, or the taste of the government, the master of

the house, and his friends assembled in it, become chargeable with an offence, and are summoned before a correctional tribunal! Such is the inquisition of the Pays de Vaud".

Oh, how thankful ought Englishmen to be that they can worship God according to their consciences! Here is a Protestant canton, in which toleration is publicly disclaimed; and the little Catholic cantons do not suffer a Protestant to reside in their territory. How has the confidence of Englishmen been abused, in supposing that Switzerland was the land of civil and religious liberty; and how mistaken have been those sympathies with which we have hitherto felt ourselves attached to that supposed free and enlightened country!

The circular which accompanied the arrêté professes to assign reasons for the adoption of it; and truly they are much wanted. But the case is a bad one, even on their own statement of it. A young minister, having been deprived of his ecclesiastical functions, unites for worship with some others, in a place not belonging to the Established Church. And why not? There was no law against it; there was not even the pretext of law.

Another minister told a schoolmaster, in the middle of his class, that he instructed the children in a false religion; and described as the work of satan the catechism in use in the canton. Very reprehensible, no doubt; but in order to pass a censure on the expression, was it necessary to pass a decree like this?

A third minister resigned his official post, and was interdicted every ecclesiastical function. He continued, nevertheless, to form religious assemblies. Was he forbidden to do so by the law? Finally, these three ministers applied to the government, expressing their determination to separate from the Established Church, and requesting permission to exercise their ministry

*See de l'Arrêté, &c. p. 21.

elsewhere. Such are the gravamina as alleged in the circular! Such the reasons for a display of intolerance unexampled in the modern history of Protestant Europe!

How much more weighty the accusations which these oppressed men have to urge against their persecutors! They have been insulted and maltreated; their houses have been attacked, and their windows broken the circular itself lets out the fact of such disorders; and all this has been done with impunity: not, one of the authors of these outrages has been punished! The sagacious members of the Council must have calculated largely upon the simplicity of the world, when they bring these occurrences matter of charge against the persons designated as Mummers: they might as well, says our author, cast the blame of St. Bartholomew's day upon the Protestants: if there had been no Protestants, there would have been no massacre.

[ocr errors]

as

But, say some apologists, what could the Council of State do? The majority of the people were strongly against the new opinions; that is, we beg leave to add, against the old opinions of the Helvetic Confession. Is the canton then governed by a mob? Does the Council of State

The author of the article, "Des Persécutions Religieuses," ridicules very happily these miserable apologies He supposes some strangers to arrive in the canton. "Ils arrivent, ils voient la foule attroupée, ils entendent des cris, des imprécations, des menaces proférées contre des citoyens paisibles en apparence et qui ne réclament d'autre privilége que celui de rester tranquilles dans l'asile de leur maison. Etonnés de ces scènes de désordre, dignes de la populace de Naples ou de Madrid, au milieu d'un pays qu'on leur avait vanté comme sage, libre et heureux, ils s'approchent des moins exaspérés, ils leur deman. dent quels sont les objets de la fureur populaire. Sont-ce des malfaiteurs que l'on poursuit? Sont-ce des vagabonds ou des perturbateurs de la paix publique ?Non, ce sont des Mômiers.-Mais qu'estce que des Mômiers?-C'est une secte dont le gouvernement ne veut pas. Quelle est donc la croyance qu'enseigne cette secte?-Nous n'en savons trop rien,

count noses, the noses of all their population, before they can decide how to act? Is their wisdom nothing better than the folly of "the sovereign people."

But then these Mômiers are so exclusive, so narrow and strict in their religious views, and would be so intolerant, if they could!" Is there an act of tyranny on the part of any government which may not be defended on principles like these?

The hope was entertained by some charitable individuals, that the above decree of the Council of State would soon be rescinded: it was deemed impossible that, in the march of intellect and science with which M. Chenevière would amuse us, such a decree could long exist to the disgrace of its authors, and the sorrow of every candid and Christian mind. But the honoura ble counsellors are made of sterner stuff than these gentlemen had imagined: they are root-and-branch men; and they know, that, provided measures of sufficient severity be pertinaciously maintained, the end of outward uniformity will, in all likelihood, be eventually accomplished. Far, therefore, from dreaming of relaxation, they have prevailed upon themselves, with all Christendom looking on, to pass a new law still more marvellous and more revolting than the arrêté. It forms the subject of the spirited and excellent tract entitled "Des Persecutions Religieuses, &c." a publication of which also we avail ourselves; and it may be seen either in that little work, p. 2, or in the second edition of the Rev. D. Wilson's Tour, vol. I.

p. 319, which we refer to for the sake of the interesting statements and reflections of the author,

mais nous sommes certains qu'elle est suspecte au gouvernement.

"Qu'ensuite on se tourne vers le gouvernement et qu'on lui demande comment les représentans d'un peuple libre ont pu souiller leur code d'une loi de proscription; on vous répond qu'il a été impossible de résister au vœu populaire. Conçoit-on un cercle vicieux plus étrange?" pp. 8, 9.

« PredošláPokračovať »