Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

profaning it with outrages and blasphemies, which would be a disgrace to civilised, not to say religious beings, if used in the streets, or in a bear-garden, instead of in a church.

We shall be sorry if our statements or remarks should wound the feelings of such conscientious and pious dissenters as we mention, but we believe that by appealing to their Common Sense' we shall take from them ground of offence.

6

Throughout his life, Dr. Molesworth always maintained friendly relations with dissenters, when permitted by them. His views regarding dissenters bore a remarkable resemblance to those which had been expressed by Dr. Hook:

That schism is a sin we know ; but that every schismatic is a sinner, I by no means admit; and yet, it may be charity in me in some instances to tell him that I consider him schismatic, in order to awake him to inquiry ;-in some instances I say (for my rule is never to disturb the faith of those who have been educated in dissent), if they hold the doctrine of Atonement, if they are persons not qualified to judge of the differences between us.

[ocr errors]

If you find that, by the training of the Evangelical school, you increase in holiness by self-discipline, adhere to that school; through it you will pass, I doubt not, into the higher or Catholic school; but, whatever you do, let your object be, not to form opinions or sit in judgment on the opinions of others, but simply to become more holy; and if, in the endeavour to become more holy, some shall be led into absurdities, (as you think them,) whether Methodistic or Popish absurdities, condemn them not until you hope you have become as holy as they...

The character of 'Parson Stirling,' 1 in Dr. Molesworth's tale 'Overbury,' appears to give his own ideal of a clergyman and his relations towards dissent.

A more indulgent rector, a better parish priest or a more kind-hearted and useful neighbour (than the Rev. Mr. Stirling) was not easily to be met with. But, notwithstanding these good qualities, he was not able, neither did he expect, to make all people think alike upon religion. .

1 See Overbury, p. 125.

[ocr errors]

Mr. Stirling trusted that, though he should find in Overbury a man of different opinions, and a talented rival, yet he should also find him a man of education, liberally disposed, not desirous to exercise his office vexatiously, with sectarian and envious feelings, but as a truly religious and charitable dissenter. Mr. Stirling knew he could not prevent dissent, and looked upon the election of such a man as an advantage gained to himself and his parish. Instead of wishing to diminish the respect of the people towards him, he took an early opportunity of testifying his own favourable sentiments by calling at his lodgings.

LOYALTY

Ir was not long before the enemies of the Church found an opportunity for attacking the new vicar.

On Sunday, February 8, 1840, he preached a stirring sermon at St. Mary's Church, Rochdale, suggesting that the occasion of the Queen's marriage should be celebrated by a national subscription for a memorial of the event, in the shape of a new church or churches in the parish. Mr. John Bright's sentiments on this point were somewhat disloyal, as the following entry in his 'Diary,' dated February 10, 1840, shows:

This day the Queen is married; in Rochdale there is no appearance of rejoicing, and how or why should there be ? The people are discontented, out of employ, short of food. Let the Government repeal the Corn Laws, cease to plunder the mass for the aggrandisement of the aristocracy, and give them education in spite of the Church; and then they may reasonably be asked to show some pleasure at the Royal marriage.

Shortly afterwards Mr. John Bright's loyalty was warmed up to blood heat by the chance of a hit at the new vicar.

6

The attempted assassination of her Majesty the Queen, on June 10, 1840, had excited much horror and indignation, as well as sympathy with the Queen; and Dr. Molesworth, believing that in an expression of loyalty, all party feeling might be merged, and anxious to meet his neighbours on neutral ground,' wrote to two leading magistrates in Rochdale-both opposed to him in politics-expressing his ‘desire to unite all parties in an address to the Queen.' He stated that he had 'no wish to take the lead'; but that he was willing to co-operate with them in any way that might be helpful.'

6

In response to this letter, the two magistrates took the management of the address, and issued placards announcing that the vicar would take the chair.

The meeting was held on June 17, when John Bright attended with his following, accused the vicar of being unfit to take the chair, on the ground of disloyalty to the Queen. This has been described by Mr. Bright in his 'Diary' as follows:

This morning a meeting was held in the Commissioners' room, to address the Queen on her escape from assassination. In the placard the Vicar was announced as Chairman, but J. B. compelled an appeal to the meeting, which decided against the Vicar on the ground that he had listened without rebuke to the disgraceful language uttered at a public dinner, in the city of Canterbury, on the 10th month last, disgraceful to all who tamely heard, and traitorous to the Queen.

After Mr. Bright's insult to the chairman, the meeting broke up, and the two magistrates, accompanied by most of the respectable people, left the room in disgust, and adjourned to the town hall, where they passed the address to Her Majesty. The comment of the Manchester Courier on this occasion was:

Now let it be noted that the charge, which Bright has made the pretext of his hypocritical affectation of loyalty, and his outrageous and ungentlemanly brawling, has been already publicly discussed and disproved by the Vicar of Rochdale in The Times.

This calumny rested on the authority of an article in a Radical evening paper, which gave a mischievous and mendacious account of a speech by Mr. Bradshaw, the Conservative M.P. for Canterbury. It was apparently the production of one who, having absconded from his bail, became editor of a Radical paper, which dealt with infamous personalities, until he was soundly horsewhipped, and his appeal to a jury resulted in one farthing damages. There was the less excuse for branding Dr. Molesworth with this stigma, inasmuch as Bradshaw's speech had become a subject of public notoriety and interest throughout the whole country, in consequence of a duel between Bradshaw and Mr. Horsman, Liberal M.P. for Cockermouth, who had insulted Bradshaw, taxing him with disgraceful conduct.

E

Mr. Horsman afterwards publicly declared that, had he earlier received an explanation of the true intent of this speech, he would not have uttered the offensive words that led to the hostile meeting.

Moreover, the question had been thoroughly thrashed out in The Times of January 20, 1840 (about six months before the Rochdale meeting), in an article which administered a scathing rebuke to the 'Whig fags,' for stirring up ill-feeling without cause.

Subsequently, at a public meeting on behalf of the United Church of England and Ireland (Lord Sandon in the chair), Dr. Molesworth said:

I came to your county a stranger. I came here with calumny cast upon me,-the foulest of all calumnies,-that I am disloyal to the Queen. I was charged with being present at a dinner at Canterbury, at which Mr. Bradshaw, it was said, had made a speech which reflected upon the character of the Queen. I was charged with proposing that gentleman's health. I was charged with approving the words he was said to have uttered. Now, gentlemen, I am happy to take this opportunity, before the whole county, to state that the accusation was false. (Loud applause.) I was present at that meeting, but I never heard any such words uttered by Mr. Bradshaw as were imputed to him. If I had heard such words, there is no one who would more decidedly, and more distinctly have disapproved of them. (Loud applause.) Loyalty has been with me an instinct; it has been with me a habit, which has, to use the words of the motto above me [alluding to the inscription on the banner], 'grown with my growth and strengthened with my strength.'1

1 Lancashire General Advertiser, October 24, 1840.

« AnteriorContinuar »