« PreviousContinue »
not to circulate the Apocrypha, and that he is determined to found a new Bible Society at Niort, not to correspond with that at Paris, which is addicted to this fault, but with those in England." The writer adds, "M. O., one of the refugees from the canton de Vaud, is travelling in the departments to awaken attention to this subject; he calls on the pastors, argues with them, and reads to them a tractate which he has written against the Apocrypha. His zeal, adds the writer, knows no bounds; when he cannot ride he walks; and he seems determined to visit the whole of the midland districts of France.
PROTESTANT CONVERTS IN
We lament to learn that the conIdition of the honourable band of confessors at Gallneukirchen, who, instructed
by the scriptural ministrations of Martin Bos, had been led to separate themselves from the corrupt Church of Rome, is very afflicting. Though the laws permit Roman Catholics openly to embrace Protestantism, if, after undergoing the instructions of a priest, they persist in wishing to do so; yet, in point of fact, this permission is procrastinated by every excuse, with a view to tire out the constancy of the convert. The Protestants continue however to meet for the worship of God in secret, though with the certainty of imprisonment and severe penalties as often as they are discovered. They have borne their persecutions with great meekness and constancy; and the prayers of their fellow Christians will not be wanting that they may be abundantly strengthened, by the presence of their Saviour, and the consolations of his Holy Spirit, and a way opened for their deliverance.
SACHARISSA, AN INDIAN CHIEF. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THE poet asks: "All our praises why should lords engross?" And the Christian may in like manner ask, why should our notices of the power and grace of God in the conversion and subsequent holy life of sinners, be confined to persons of our own "clime, complexion, or degree?" True religion, in all ages, under all latitudes, and every circumstance of human life, is substantially the same. It is trusted that its power was felt by the subject of the following brief notice.
Departed this life, some months since, Sacharissa, the principal and venerable Chief of the Tuscarora Indians. He was educated a heathen, in all the sins and prejudices of his tribe; but by the mercy of God be was among the first of that tribe who embraced the blessed doctrines of the Gospel, with the requisitions of which his external conduct and appearance well accorded. During four months of his last illness his sufferings were intense: but they were borne with great fortitude, and resignation to the will of God. He arrived at the advanced age of eighty-three
years, and died lamented by numerous attached friends and acquaintance. The tears and sobs visible among his own people, when his remains were about to be conveyed to the grave, strongly evinced the attachment and affection which they cherished towards him. He will be affectionately remembered by those who walked with him to the sanctuary of God. He early acceded to proposals made by the New-York Missionary Society, for instructing his people in the great truths of Christianity, and remained faithful to his profession to the last. He ever manifested affection and respect for missionaries who came among his people, and treated them as the servants of Christ. The blessed message which they brought, it is fervently hoped, had affected his own heart; and though more enlightened nations may feel something bordering upon contempt for an obscure Indian chief, yet who can say how many will for ever live to call him blessed, for having been the instrument of erecting among his savage tribe the Cross of the Redeemer, who died alike for all, and whose kingdom will not be perfected without trophies from every nation and tribe under heaven?
VIEW OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS.
FRANCE.-In our last Number we remarked, that the French government would need all the eclat arising from the capture of Algiers to meet the new Chamber of Deputies, who were considerably more anti-ministerial and constitutional than the former, which had just been dissolved on this very account. We added, that the King and his ministers must before long" either yield to the public feeling in the cast of their policy, or come to an open, and perhaps fatal, collision;" and we expressed our apprehensions lest, whichever party might triumph, true Religion would be endangered; the ultraliberals being too generally the disciples of Voltaire, and the ultra-royalists the devotees of Rome. Our chief hope, we added, was from the influence of "that somewhat small number of persons, of truly liberal and enlightened mind, who are at once genuine constitutionalists in politics, and sincere friends of religion;" to whom we mainly looked "to avert the opposite evils which threatened their country.'
Little did we anticipate, what the revolution of a few hours informed us of-that at the very moment when we were writing those remarks the "open and fatal collision," which we apprehended, had commenced; that the infatuated King, and his his more infatuated ministers, had issued edicts virtually abolishing the constitution as established by the charter, and rendering the government a pure despotism; and that Paris, and ultimately the whole nation, was in arms, as one man, to resist this unconstitutional aggression.
The ultimate result of the proceedings in France, during the last few years, and especially the last few months, every considerate person must have anticipated; but it was still possible that the king might be forced to the alternative we mentioned, of yielding to the public feeling, and thus for a while avert that "fatal collision" which seemed otherwise inevitable; or, even should he persist with only common sagacity in his unhappy views of policy, the struggle might be protracted, much blood might be shed, and it might be only after many years of anarchy that France would really and practically enjoy the blessings of rational freedom. But the blind rashness and obstinacy of Charles X. and his advisers have precipitated events beyond all calculation or parallel; and in a few short days has been commenced and completed a second-rather might we say, a fifth or sixth-revolution, the ultimate results of which, to France and to all Europe, it is
far beyond the ken of human sagacity to foresee We will briefly recapitulate a few of the memorabilia of these extraordinary events.
On the 26th of July appeared in the Moniteur, the government paper, a most extravagant report, signed by the ministers Polignac, Chantelauze, D'Haussey, Peyronnet, Montbel, De Guernon Ranville, and Capelle, declaring to his majesty that the nation was in a dreadful state of anarchy; reprobating the late constitutional elections; declaiming at great length, and with much vehemence, against the periodical press; and recommending certain measures, alleged to be "within the true spirit of the charter," but "beyond the limits of legal order, the resources of which had been exhausted in vain." What these measures were, appeared too fatally in the ordinances of the King, published at the same time, and dated July 25 (Sunday!), suspending the liberty of the periodical press, establishing a censorship, commanding that no writing under twenty pages should be published without a warrant of the public authorities, illegally dissolving the newly-elected chamber of deputies before its meeting, and ordaining, in defiance of the charter, a new scheme of representation, under which a fresh parliament was to be elected. The despotic character of these ordinances could only be equalled by their suicidal fatuity. How the king and his ministry could have been so blinded as to embark on this fatal course, is a mystery that remains to be developed. They were urged on, it is very clear, by the devotees of the Church of Rome, and they possibly were not without hope of support, if necessary, from some of the continental despotisms; but that they received any shadow of countenance from the British cabinet is utterly improbable and incredible. There are, indeed, those among us who have spoken and written very indiscreetly, recommending those very measures which have proved their ruin the Quarterly Review, for example, has in the very last number lamented that Louis XVIII., "in an evil hour, entangled himself and his successors by the crude and ill-advised engagement" of a constitutional charter, instead of governing despotically; they "would hail the censorship of the press;" and they "hope and trust the king and his ministers may succeed" in effecting this object, and in extinguishing the chamber of deputies as an independent body; all which, they own, "would be a virtual abolition of the charter" which the king had sworn
to obey, but this they account a comparatively trifling evil. Now, if respectable writers in Great Britain can descant thus lightly upon the violation of constitutional oaths and pledges, and thus prefer, at least for their neighbours, a despotism, like that of Ferdinand or Miguel, to a limited monarchy and a representative government, we are not astonished that the parties in France who thought it their interest to act upon such notions, calculated upon receiving better support than they have met with, or are likely to meet with, in carrying them into practice. But though such speculations might sound very plausibly three months ago, in the Vatican, at the Tuilleries, or in the pages of the Quarterly Review, it is impossible to conceive for a moment that they could have ever entered the mind of a statesman like the Duke of Wellington; the best proof of which is, that our government have declined recognising Charles X. or his grandson in a royal capacity, and have acknowledged the new government, which they could not with any justice have done, had they themselves abetted the measures which led to their downfall.
As soon as the above ordinances were announced, all Paris was in a state of the most fervid excitement. The conductors of the newspapers, almost in a body, refused to obey the censorship, and, while the soldiers were destroying their presses, published with their names a declaration that the government had lost that character of legality which commands obedience, and that the chamber of deputies was in legal existence, and empowered to meet and act. A considerable number of the deputies consulted together, and determined to support the charter; and a strong expression of public opinion began to be heard, that the king had forfeited his crown. To quell the public feeling, and enforce the ordinances, large bodies of troops were posted throughout Paris; artillery was mounted; and during Tuesday the 27th various skirmishes ensued between the populace and the military. By the next day the contest became general, and the slaughter on both sides filled the streets with heaps of dead bodies. But the people were undaunted and determined: they formed themselves into a national guard; the youth of the polytechnic school led them on; and the soldiers, with the exception of the Swiss guards, began to throw down their arms, unwilling to fire upon their countrymen. A compromise might still have been effected, but the government obstinately adhered to its ordinances, and determined to enforce them at the point of the bayonet. By Thursday, after fearful scenes of bloodshed, the constitutional party had obtained a complete triumph over the military; who were driven out of Paris, leaving the palace of the Tuilleries and all the public
buildings in possession of the people. The deputies had also formed a provisional government, and appointed the well-known Lafayette commander of the national guard. On Friday the municipal commission declared that Charles X., having violated the charter and made war upon the people, had ceased to reign. On Saturday the king fled; and the same day the Duke of Orleans was declared by the chamber of deputies Lieutenant-general of the kingdom. Thus in less than one week from the signing of the fatal ordinances, the whole frame of the late government was subverted by the almost unanimous voice of the people. The succeeding events succeeded with almost equal rapidity; the provincial towns every where followed the example of Paris; the threecoloured cockade was declared again the national emblem; the King and the Dauphin too late resigned the crown in favour of the young Duke de Bordeaux; but the deputies refused to accept this nomination, declared the throne vacant, and proceeded to offer it to the Duke of Orleans and his male heirs, under the title of King of the French, with the guarantee and restrictions of a new charter, or bill of rights. The charter, thus modified, declares, among other points, that all power originates in the people; that each of the three estates of the realm shall enjoy the important right of proposing bills-which the late charter confined to the crown, so that nothing could ever come under legislative discussion but what the ministry for the time being approved; that the Roman Catholic religion is professed by the majority of Frenchmen, and that its ministers shall be supported, together with those of other Christian doctrines, at the public expense-thus placing all sects upon one footing; that the house of deputies is quinquennial; that candidates shall be eligible at the age of thirty, instead of forty, and electors may vote at the age of twenty-five, instead of thirty; that trial by jury shall be extended to offences of the press, and political delinquencies; that the king's ministers are responsible for the acts of government; that the sittings of the house of peers shall be public; that every facility shall be given to public instruction, and the liberty of teaching; that the censorship of the press is abolished, and shall never be revived; that all the peerages conferred by the late king shall be void; and that the new charter is confided to the patriotism of the national guard and the citizens of France. The consent of the peers was not asked to this charter, but they have acceded to it, only not pronouncing upon the article annulling the late peerages, which they refer to the wisdom of the present king.
To discuss the many questions involved in these alterations of the constitutional charter, would be to dilate upon the whole
controversy respecting civil government. We see no benefit from laying down abstract propositions as to the power in which civil government originates. "By Me kings reign, and princes decree justice," is the declaration of Him who is King of kings and Lord of lords; this every Christian will acknowledge; but the practical question, who is the temporal king that thus reigns, must be settled by the circumstances of the country. The house of Brunswick reigns in England by Divine right, as much as did the house of Stuart or Tudor. The Roman Catholic bigots of France had instilled into the late king the notion that his claims to govern were indefeasible, originating in an authority independent of the wishes or the power of his subjects; in a word, that he was absolute; as if Divine right literally meant "the right divine of kings to govern wrong." To counteract this proposition, the new bill of rights sets up another, which, though it may be understood in a moderate sense, so as to mean nothing inconsistent with the paramount truth that "the powers that be are ordained of God "the national will, it may be alleged, being spoken of, not in regard to an abstract theological proposition, but only in its practical application between man and man, without which no abuses in government could be corrected, and one man's pleasure must be absolute law to millions; yet is also liable to be construed, or at least objected to, in its atheistic, and not merely its political, sense. Every sensible, well-informed Christian knows how to reconcile our own bill of rights, by which our beloved monarchs reign by the will of the people, with the Divine authority, which in a higher view regulates and overrules all human intercourse; but, as abstract propositions on such matters are liable to mistake, and offer a snare for weak consciences, and ground for party jangling, they were surely much better avoided. We know the cabals that disturbed our own country for half a century on a similar question; the Pretender pleading Divine right, and the Brunswick family the will of the people; as if in truth there was not a third question, which reconciled both the former.
With regard to the alterations in the charter, most of them resemble so nearly our own far-famed constitution, that it is impossible not to approve of them; and, remembering the excitement of the moment, and the strong feeling in France in favour of democracy, we may consider them more moderate than could have been expected. The most doubtful we think to be, that which annuls all the peerages, ninety in number, conferred by the late king. Those peerages were legally conferred, though to serve a bad purpose, to promote papal and political tyranny; and
it must be a strong case indeed which can punish any man by an ex post facto law. At the same time, it must be acknowledged that the generality of these new peers were leagued in opposition to the best interests of their country; that the only object of their promotion was to subvert them; and that their basely, though legally, acquired rank, might even now be fatal to the public safety. Still, the measure, unless grounded on alarming fears of their using their power to effect a counterrevolution, seems at variance with that calm and moderate spirit which the deputies _profess_themselves anxious to dis-` play. But the French have a proverb, that revolutions are not made with rose-water; and, comparing this act of disfranchisement with the severities, proscriptions, and bloodshed, which usually follow national convulsions, it forms a striking contrast on the side of clemency. The conduct of the deputies and the populace, in allowing the king a safe and unmolested retreat, is much to their credit; nor does there seem any wish to carry rigour to the extreme even against the late ministers, against whom the public indignation is very violent; for though they are to be legally tried for high treason, and several of them are already captured in their flight, no personal violence has been offered to them, no special commission has been issued to try them, and a proposition is actually before the house of deputies to pass a law abolishing the punishment of death; which, if carried into effect, will spare their lives, even without the necessity of a commutation of punishment by the royal prerogative. This remarkable proposition, which is warmly espoused by the leading deputies, and urged with zeal by the new king, shews that the horrors of the revolution of 1792 and the succeeding years, have not been lost upon the French people or their leaders. Most heartily do we wish them success in this truly humane and enlightened proposal.
The new ministry consists of the following members: Foreign affairs, Count de Mole; Minister of War, General Gerard; Finance, Baron Louis; Public instruction and president of the council, the Duke de Broglie; for the Interior, M. de Guizot; the Marine, General Sebastiani; and Justice, M. de l'Eure. It seems on all hands to be admitted that this selection is highly judicious. Two only of the number, Gerard and Sebastiani, are stated to be inclined to republicanism; but even they have yielded to the expediency of a limited constitutional monarchy, to which their colleagues are cordially attached. M. Guizot, the minister for the Home Department, is a Protestant, and the translator of Gibbon's Decline and Fall, with notes to counteract the scepticism of that work. The Duke de Broglie is well known to our readers for his zealous efforts in every
cause of enlightened benevolence and humanity, especially for his unwearied labours to exterminate the French illegal slave-trade; that dire blot upon France, and which, in defiance of promises and treaties, the late government refused to extirpate. His office, we trust, will enable him to do much to promote public education; and the Protestant ladies of Paris will continue to find in his pious and accomplished duchess, the sister of the late lamented Baron de Stael, a zealous patron and coadjutor in those plans of Christian wisdom and benevolence, especially Bible, Missionary, Tract, and Education Societies, which have of late so hopefully sprung up among them. (See her excellent paper on Female Bible Associations, in our vol. for 1824, p. 297; and her account of the Paris Female Missionary Association, Christ. Observer, 1827, p. 789).
We have been struck, throughout all these transactions, with the blessings which result from a constitutional government and parliamentary representation, such as we ourselves enjoy, or even under less auspicious forms. The Chamber of Deputies has been mainly the means of saving France from the protracted horrors of her first revolution. It was a known, acknowledged body, the emanation of the public feeling and intelligence; and it at once stepped in, assumed for a moment the helm, steered between contending parties-between clamorous republicans and imperious ultra-royalists, papal devotees and avowed infidels and atheistsand anchored the vessel of the state, if not in moorings wholly untroubled by political agitation, at least more safe and tranquil than could have been hoped for. On the union and moderation of this body depend much of the future hopes of France. The elements are still troubled; factions are rife; Jesuits, democrats, and non-jurors are anxious to destroy the new fabric; there is a young pretender, who calls himself the lawful king; and circumstances may arise in which, at some future day, his name may be used by powers at war with France to excite seditions; while some opposite faction may possibly plead for the excluded dynasty of Napoleon; even in both chambers, espe. cially among the peers, many individuals have refused to take the new oaths: so that wisdom, caution, good faith, and beneficial measures, are necessary to maintain the existing order of affairs. If these are exhibited, we shall rejoice to witness them; and if not, there still is no reason that Great Britain should interfere to rectify the matter. We have nothing to do with the internal affairs of France: we have granted, as hospitality required, a temporary asylum for the late king, in his private capacity, with his family and suite; but it is not for us to take any part in
these matters, except to maintain with the actual government those relations of peace and good-will which are for the mutual benefit of both nations. The constitution which they now possess greatly resembles our own, and we wish them all possible happiness and prosperity under it; but most earnestly do we deprecate the inflammatory proceedings of some among ourselves, who are holding out the example of our neighbours, as if we also at home needed a revolution to put us upon a level with them; whereas we have enjoyed for many generations, more than any other nation, all that secures national peace, prosperity, and freedom. The comparison is as utterly misplaced, in all its parts, as it is factious.
We had intended to notice some other foreign matters, but must now postpone them. Rumours are abroad of tumults in Spain, and other places-likely enough to take place before long, but probably premature. We cannot but see in the new revolution in France a just retribution for the falsehood, perfidy, and injustice which marked the late invasion of Spain. The Bourbons put down the constitution in that country, only to feel the recoil of their arms upon their own throne. Where these affairs may ultimately end is known only to Him who sees and knows all things from the beginning. May He, in his infinite mercy, avert whatever evils may threaten, and turn all to his own glory, and the best welfare of his weak and sinful creatures !
With a few exceptions, the elections have proceeded with comparatively small excitement. The general result is considered to be unfavourable to the views of the present administration: but if a cabinet will honestly consult the public interests, it has little to fear from the expression of public opinion; and if it does not, we do not regret to see weakened that miserable system of interested clanship and party-voting which is too common in all our public bodies, and by no means rare in our legislature. Among the more remarkable incidents may be mentioned Mr. Hume's coming in without opposition for Middlesex: Mr. R. Grant being returned for Norwich: Lord Russel and Dr. Lushington being thrown outthe one for Bedford, and the other for Reading-in consequence, among other causes, of Lord J. Russel's having offended the Wesleyan Methodists, and Dr. Lushington the Dissenters; though, in both cases, there seems to have been some misapprehension: the Bristol election, in which Mr. Protheroe, on account of his honourable anti-slavery protest, was thrown out, after an arduous struggle, by the powerful influence and weighty purse of the West-India party, who determined to retain Mr. Baillie, as a pro-slavery ad