cable to the merchants of Great Britain generally. The following "Recommendation" was accordingly drawn up, and signed by several leading names :— A suggestion having been made by a few advocates of the cause of Peace that friendly addresses from merchants, and the various other classes of the community in this country, to corresponding classes of the community in America, as fellow-citizens of the world, mutually dependent the one upon the other, and therefore mutually interested in averting War, might be very seasonable; that they might prove as oil thrown on the troubled waters of discord, and at the present juncture exert a salutary influence on the public mind, in both nations; it is proposed that brief addresses should accordingly be transmitted to our American brethren, deprecating so dire a calamity as War, and contrasting with it the untold blessings of Peace, referring to the dependence of commerce on peace, urging national arbitration, for the adjustment of national disputes, acknowledging our mutual dependence, and the direct dependence of us all on the bountiful providence of Him, who having made the sea as a highway for the nations, and the "trade-wind" as a wafting power, has, in His goodness thus designed that the varied products of the varying climes of the earth should be freely borne by the winds of Heaven upon the waters of the deep, from the shores of one nation to the shores of another. This "Recommendation,' ,"dated December 29th, 1845, and the "Appeal to British Merchants," were' transmitted to Elihu Burrit, well known as the learned Blacksmith of America, who made them into one of his so-called "olive leaves," and wrote an appeal to the clergy of all denominations in both countries, urging them to forward the cause of Peace. Since that period the "Recommendation," has been signed by hundreds in this country, including some of the nobility and other influential members of the Anti-Corn-law League, together with several of the most eminent and strenuous advocates of the sacred cause of Temperance and Peace. The Address from Plymouth, Old England, to Plymouth, Massachusetts, is as follows: Friendly Appeal from the Inhabitants of Plymouth, Great Britain, to the Citizens of the United States of America, for the purpose of averting War between the two countries. TO THE LEGISLATORS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES FRIENDS AND BRETHREN-We are deeply concerned to perceive that there are any indications, how remote soever, of threatened hostility between your country and our own. Towards your nation we entertain, in common with the vast majority of our fellow-subjects, feelings of sincere good-will. As the friends of Peace throughout the world, we * We give this address as we find it described; but we must confess we cannot discern why it should be called an address from Plymouth in England to Plymouth in America in particular, and not rather an address to American citizens generally.-ED. desire that all those who delight in War may be scattered; but with you, to whom we are allied by community of national origin, by identity of language, by similarity in many of our laws and institutions, we earnestly and especially deprecate hostility. Moreover, by War our commercial intercourse would be seriously impeded, the progress of civilization and of science be obstructed, immense pecuniary loss be incurred, domestic ties be broken, humanity be outraged, life to a fearful extent be sacrificed, and dire offence committed against the laws of our beneficent Creator. By War we must both lose much; and what would the victor gain that would be worth one-thousandth part of the cost of the conflict? Again, whatever be the value of the Oregon territory, it would be a poor compensation to the owner for the blood and treasure which would be spent in acquiring it; and then, too, the dispute respecting it may so easily be settled by arbitration, if other and simpler means be ineffectual. Let us, we entreat you, agree to exert all our influence, personal and political, on each side of the Atlantic, to frustrate the devices of those ambitious and reckless spirits, in either country, who, by precipitating us into conflict, would render us the scorn of the world; while the energies and influence of two great nations, which ought to be combined for the benefit of the entire human race, would be foolishly and wickedly employed in inflicting mutual and widely-spread injury and destruction. Allow us, then, to hope that your cordial response to this appeal may strengthen the bonds of amity between us, and promote the interests of universal peace. Dated, Jan. 27th, 1846. (Signed by several hundreds of the inhabitants of Plymouth, headed by the mayor, and six borough and county magistrates, and two clergymen of the Establishment.) The address from Boston in England to Boston in America, contains, among others, the following excellent remarks: We believe War to be an evil-a pure evil, unattended by any good in its motives, actions, or results-an evil so tremendous that no earthly consideration can justify it. We are convinced that War is destructive to all the interests of humanity, to happiness and liberty, to commerce and wealth, to science, arts, and civilization, to learning and intelligence, to philanthropy and religion. We regard War as unreasonable; for even should it prove which party had the most strength, it would never show on which side was the most right; and we doubt not that any good which may in some cases be supposed to have resulted from fighting, could have been secured in a greater degree, more rapidly, more effectually, more widely, more permanently, and far more cheaply, by negotiation. We consider War to be condemned alike by the voice of conscience and experience, by natural and revealed religion; and to be unworthy of the nature of man, and contrary to the will of God. We therefore protest against our being called out to fight either against you or any other portion of the one family of man," &c. The spirit in which these addresses were met by the people of America may be gathered from the following admirable response from the merchants and other inha bitants of the city of New York, a copy of which appeared in the New York Journal of Commerce : TO THE FRIENDS OF PEACE THROUGHOUT THE BRITISH REALM, The undersigned merchants and other inhabitants of the city of New York, earnestly desiring the preservation of Peace between the two countries, are the more encouraged to expect it when they find the hearts of so many in the Fatherland beating in unison with their own. No triumphs of brute force over moral right ever did or can command our admiration as do those peaceful overtures, coming from a nation so powerful as England, and so well prepared for a conflict of arms; and none, we are sure, were ever so approved by the Prince of Peace. The effect of these "Friendly Addresses" upon the public mind in this country will be eminently favourable, and will do much to promote that hearty good-will which ought ever to prevail between nations bound together by so many sacred ties. Go on, then, respected friends, in your labour of love and mercy. Tell your people that our noisiest men are not the best exponents of the national sentiment towards Great Britain, or in regard to War. Tell them that in the nation at large there is a vast aggregate of moral worth, which, when called into action, as it is beginning to be, by the threatened calamities of a causeless and unnecessary War, will assuredly repress ambition, or turn it into a more peaceful channel. Tell them that this effect is already visible to a most gratifying extent, not only in our maritime cities, but throughout the land; and that it has been aided by the relaxation of the restrictive features of your commercial policy. A War of concession, compromise, mutual forbearance, and good fellowship, resulting, as they necessarily must, in increasing trade, intellectual advancement, and progress in everything truly great and good, is the only War which we wish to see waged between the two nations. As to Oregon, although from comparative proximity we naturally desire our proper share of that extensive territory, yet we will gladly concur (and we believe such is the general voice of the nation) in any fair measures of compromise or reference, which the two Governments may see fit to adopt, for the peaceable adjustment of the question. It is clearly one which ought not, under any circumstances, to breed a War between the two countries; and we hold, that without the most deplorable obstinacy and the blackest guilt on the part of one or both of the claimants, such an issue is impossible. As a matter of profit and loss, it would be infinitely better that the whole of Oregon should be sunk to the bottom of the ocean, than that two such nations as Great Britain and the United States should go to War about it, to the disgrace of civilization, Christianity, and rational freedom. With a firm belief in the pacific disposition of both Governments, and that they will yet be enabled to settle the controversy in a manner at once just and honourable to all concerned, we look forward with hope to the future, and in the meantime beg leave to subscribe ourselves your friends and well-wishers. THE “QUARTERLY REVIEW" ON MR. NEWMAN'S "DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE." To the Editor of the "Unitarian." DEAR SIR,-In the last number of the Quarterly Review, I have been reading a very long and elaborate article on Mr. Newman's work, entitled, “An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine." In that article there is a passage, which, while it contains a statement deprecatory of Unitarianism, propounds an opinion concerning the worship of the Virgin, that, I conceive, not only tends to neutralise the force of the reviewer's previous remarks, but may serve as a valid argument for the Unitarian to employ against the doctrine of a Trinity. But before I submit this passage to your notice, I have a few general observations to make, and one or two on the style and manner of the article itself. Free from the spirit of Sectarianism, I am accustomed to read, as far as my means and leisure will permit, the leading publications of all parties; and I look upon the Quarterly among reviews, much in the same light as we are accustomed to regard the Times among newspapers. For years I have derived much instruction and profit, as well as pleasure, from the pages of the Quarterly Review, more particularly from its literary, scientific, and historical papers. Its theology, I must confess, I never did thoroughly comprehend. Perhaps, however, that may have arisen from my own want of understanding. Be that as it may, I do profess to have some notions with regard to grammar and style; and, in this respect, as in some others, the Quarterly, as every one knows, lays claim to the office of an arbiter elegantiarum. Its circulation is very extensive, especially among the higher, more polished, and better educated classes of society; and hence the greater need there is, that its style should be grammatical, elegant, and classical, without dispensing with the more taking qualities, where occasion requires them, of brilliancy and sprightliness. Moreover, in treating abstruse subjects of theology, perspicuity and precision are indispensably requisite. Yet it is in this respect that the theological writers in the Quarterly are signally deficient ; they are sometimes not even grammatical, as I shall presently show. And this is the more surprising when it is considered that these writers are undoubtedly ecclesiastics, brought up at the Universities, probably masters of colleges, and moving in the highest circles of literature and science. They manifest, indeed, great profundity of research, deep study, and much labour of thought, but a wonderful inaptitude in conveying to their readers any exact notion of the precise object and result of their speculations.* For instance, the author of the paper on Mr. Newman's book shows that he possesses "Great store of learned lumber in his head;" but how to render his knowledge intelligible to others, "In this the task and mighty labour lies." Parenthesis within parenthesis, dash after dash, the nominative case frequently separated from its verb by a dozen lines or more, a nominative without any verb, and a verb without any nominative, involutions and tortuosities at which Addison and Swift, and even Johnson would have stood aghast-erroneous collocations of words, pet qualifying phrases, such as "at least" repeated several times in a page-these are but a few of the graces of style with which the author of the article in question condescends to treat his readers. What would be the fate of a school-boy were he to show up a theme commencing with such language as the following, which begins a paragraph in this review where the opening noun is found without either government or concord? Mr. Newman, as, notwithstanding, his own warning he has revived the arguments of Petavius, so he has not feared to tread in the steps of the Father of the Oratory. He is even more prodigal in his concession.— 419. [More prodigal than whom, Petavrus or Father Simon ?] Again What wanted throughout-what is absolutely necessary, is the proof that those tenets of Medieval Christianity, which were undeveloped till a much later period, which were unknown, or which even Mr. Newman despairs of proving to have been known in primitive and Apostolic times, all which he describes himself "as an addition upon the Articles of the Creed," which he elsewhere calls the Supplement to Scriptural or Apostolic Christianity-the question is whether these (ie. the tenets, which now stands without a verb), are essential and integral parts of Christianity, to be imposed upon all Christendom on the penalty of anathema, of exclusion from the church, and in consequence (according to the inflexible theory) irremediably from eternal life.-p. 421. What can the writer mean by the development of undeveloped and dormant Christianity? If he means what he says he means, why make use of an unintelligible expression to be immediately qualified and explained by another supposed to be intelligible? Here is the paragraph : Without meaning to detract from the learning or piety of our ecclesiastical dignitaries, we cannot but bear testimony to the justness of our Correspondent's remarks, when we remember the style of an episcopal charge which appeared in the public papers some few months ago, and which elicited at the time some very pungent animadversions from the Times.-ED. |