(Proper se prononce, pour les hommes et pour les femmes, en baissant yeux et en ramenant plus ou moins haut la main au-devant du visage, comme pour se cacher pudiquement [!! ].)

les

-Savez-vous, continua-t-il, ce qui est proper, ce qui est shocking?
Ma foi, pas trop.

- Eh bien, vous verrez ce qu'il en coûte pour l'ignorer.

Puis, me regardant avec une sorte de compassion où il y avait bien aussi un peu de mépris :

-Tenez, reprit-il, si vous ne voulez pas être shocking, ne parlez jamais 'de schift [sic] (chemise de femme), de belly (ventre); si vous souffrez dans 'cet endroit, dites: I have PEINE [sic] in my stomach. Quand vous parlez de votre culotte, remplacez breeches, qui est le vrai mot, par small clothes (petits habillements)' (pp. 17, 18).

...

Our complacent and veracious traveller does not tell us what the young ladies were doing while all this interesting information was being communicated to him by his English instructor. There is much more in the book to the same effect, but we will not transcribe it. None but a Frenchman could write such a book; and none but Frenchmen could take in the pitiable trash it contains.

6

The 'Lettre de Mgr. l'Evêque d'Orléans demandant une quête générale en faveur des pauvres ouvriers rouennais' (Paris: Douniol), is a bulkier and more elaborate production. The Bishop adverts in pathetic terms to the war in America, and to the distress prevalent at Rouen and in neighbouring villages, and enlarges with great appositeness and eloquence upon the sublimity of Christian charity. Regarded in a literary point of view, this letter, like all that the Bishop writes, is an elegant and forcibie composition. Mgr. Dupanloup is not, however, very happy in his concluding paragraph. After alluding to a celebrated political economist, a certain M. Adam Schmit-of whom we must confess never having heard before, at least under that name-the Bishop says:-'La vérité est que jamais les œuvres de la charité catholique ne furent plus belles, plus larges, plus multipliées que de nos jours : c'est le salut du monde chrétien, c'est sur'tout l'honneur de la France.' This remark is rather unfortunate. We are far from wishing to depreciate the charity of French Roman Catholics, but, in the case of the starving workmen of Normandy, we must say it stands in melancholy contrast with that of Englishmen generally in the analogous case of Lancashire, and even with that of the French Protestants in behalf of their own famished Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen. It was the Protestant daily paper Le Temps that first called public attention to the frightful distress existing in different parts of Normandy, in alleviation of which a subscription was opened in its own bureaux; and it is another noticeable fact, that the largest sum of money collected in any place of worship in France in behalf of the Rouen poor-indeed, we believe it is the largest amount collected in any French church, and for any object, within the memory of man-was at the Oratoire, after a sermon by the younger Coquerel. The sum received amounted to 15,000 francs. The remainder of the paragraph, if not very reverent or in the best taste, is at least very expressive, and thoroughly French. After speaking of the 'charité catholique,' the Bishop thus continues :-'Dans la charité, comme en toute chose, la vaillance française est au premier rang. C'est, du reste, l'hommage qu'on nous rend partout. Nulle part, dit-on, la charité ne se 'fait comme en France. De fait, les plus grandes œuvres naissent chez et les nations étrangères se font une gloire de les adopter. Montronsvous dignes de notre juste renommée. Honneur aux cœurs les plus prompts! Quand une armée française a devant elle trois cent mille 'hommes armés, elle crie: Vive la France! et elle se précipite, sans qu'une compagnie laisse passer une autre compagnie avant elle. Nous

6

nous,

'sommes plus qu'une armée, nous sommes tout une grande nation catholique, et nous avons devant nous cent mille hommes affamés. Crions: Vive 'Jésus-Christ! et allons à la misère comme nous irions au feu pour la com'battre et pour la vaincre.'

Lord Stanhope has put forth, under the title of Miscellanies' (Murray), an interesting little volume, consisting of unpublished letters and memoranda by Pitt, Burke, Sir John Moore, Sir Robert Peel, Lord Macaulay, and others. The work also includes a correspondence, which took place in 1847, between Sir Robert Peel, Lord Macaulay, and the Editor himself, on the question, 'Were human sacrifices in use among the Romans?' as well as one or two short pieces of poetry by the elder Pitt, Macaulay, and others, which had not seen the light. We quite agree with the noble editor that these 'Miscellanies' are worthy of permanent record; but we think that their extrinsic value would have been increased if they had been published somewhat cheaper.

We doubt whether the cause of sisterhoods, any more than that of true religion, will be greatly benefited by such things as 'The Two Ways of Christian Life' we feel sure that the Queen's English will not.

We cordially welcome Mr. Bright's translation of 'Eighteen Sermons of S. Leo the Great on the Incarnation' (Masters). The work is enriched with a Preface containing a short account of the Author, and of his more prominent characteristics as a preacher, and with a body of notes selected from English and other theologians, illustrating and elucidating the most important passages in the sermons. These annotations, which are evidently the fruit of wide and careful reading, take up about half the volume, and are of the highest value. The whole work, in short, is a complete theological manual on the Incarnation, and the truths involved in and flowing out of it, and is admirably appropriated to the present time.

Canon Wordsworth's 'The Spirit, the Teacher of the Church,' one of the Oxford Lenten Sermons for 1863, is a striking and comprehensive discourse, written with the author's usual strength and clearness. It seems to exhaust, in a small compass, the subject of which it treats, and it is full throughout of that lofty and chastened eloquence which springs from the heart.

We have no information as to the shape which the very important question, 'The University of Durham-what shall we do with it' (by a Quondam Fellow: Saunders and Otley), may ultimately assume before it leaves the Privy Council. Meantime, Churchmen have been somewhat remiss, not to say indifferent, in regard to it, seeing that it not only touches the general question of educational endowments, but most closely affects the particular credit of theological science in England. The proposals of the Durham University Commissioners go simply to the destruction of theological study at Durham. For, having swept away Hebrewperhaps the most important field of hermeneutical theology in these times -and curtailed and cheapened the path to every other learning, and then crowned the whole by promising a Divinity Degree to the loose declaration of a bona fide adherence to the Church of England—what is there left for the work of demolition to do?

These statutory commissions-entrusted, as they are, with such enormous powers, require very close watching: and the sharp practice which has been exhibited by the Durham Commissioners does not inspire confidence. The Commissioners sat for the examination of witnesses on four days in February and March, 1862, and on June 13 of that year produced their Ordinances.' C The Ordinances were printed by order of the House on July 22, 1862, and on August 7 Parliament was prorogued. During the

recess, these Ordinances, though printed, were not procurable at the Parliamentary Paper Office, or at the Queen's Printers. Forty days are, by statute, allowed to Parliament in which to consider the result of the Commissioners' labours. But eleven days at the fag end of last session, and, practically, no day at the beginning of this session-this is the way in which so wholesome a safeguard is exercised! We say, practically, no day in this session; for it was not until the last of the forty days,' during which Parliament has the power to reject the Ordinances, that the Ordinances themselves were placed before the House of Lords, and not till a whole week after the ‘forty days' were exhausted, that the evidence on which the Ordinances are based was submitted for the information of Parliament. Thus, in effect, the opportunity of discussing one of the most revolutionary plans that was ever proposed for the reconstruction of an important Church University, has been evaded in the House of Commons, and stolen from the House of Lords.

Another fact betokens the reckless haste and off-handedness with which it is possible for a commission of this kind to do irreparable mischief. One of the commissioners, Dr. Vaughan, made and carried a valuable proposal, that the appointment of Professors and Tutors should be vested in the Warden, who, being also Dean of Durham, might not always be other than well affected to the Church. But this resolution was never entered upon the minutes. The Secretary was not in his place; and it remains to this day on the slip of paper on which Dr. Vaughan drew it up, while the Ordinances, as published in the London Gazette, and laid before Parliament, place those appointments in the hands of the Senate, the majority of which may be Dissenters or Unbelievers, and enemies to the Church of England! We gladly call attention to the 'Quondam Fellow's ' pamphlet. He is rightfully indignant at the Commissiouers' plan for, first, spoiling the University of its property, and then degrading it through its own resources. It is difficult to overstate the boldness and violence of such a measure. The property of the University of Durham is all Church property, and it is manifestly unjust to withdraw her own property from the Church's own exclusive control. But, apart from the crime of spoliation, the Commissioners' scheme is guilty of a blunder. The establishment of a lower-class University on a new model, in which degrees are to derive all their value from the cheapness and rapidity with which they may be reached-set up upon a principle of condescension to the supposed wants of the people, without any such common religious test as Chapelprayers-is not only a breach of faith with the existing members of the University, but an utter mistake in relation to the great middle-class of Englishmen, who have free access to the old Universities, who want neither easy, nor cheap, nor irreligious Academical distinctions, and who will have the real thing, as it has been always received here in England, or none.

Theology is the prime end and object for which these Church-funds were first given at Oxford, and afterwards restored at Durham. And theology being of all sciences that of which the systematic study is now the least encouraged, and the most wanted in the English Church, the Durham University funds, either at Durham, or at the old Universities, ought to be reserved for the great work to which they were solemnly destined. The revival of a theological school, affiliated by the ancient universities, which have, alas! suffered the scientific study of theology to drop from their hands, would be of inestimable value to the English Church now and in all time. The Deanery of Durham, and three Canon Professorships-Divinity, Hebrew, and Greek-besides twenty Fellowships, furnish a noble endowment for such a school. The Church of England actually possesses at this moment this endowment for this express purpose, granted to her by gifts of faith and love, and secured to her by law. Will she yield it up without a struggle?

SHORTER NOTICES OF BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS.

R. CLAY, SON, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS, BREAD STREET HILL.