tunately proved; for although the sermon was preached in October, 1809, there was no registry of the baptism of a child of Hardy the first witness, throughout the years 1808, 9, 10, and 11; and the witness Pollard lay by till the 31st of March, 1811, and then had two chil dren baptised together, the first being two years and ten days old. The witness Thomas Hart had also two children baptized on the 5th of May, 1811, the first of whom was born on the 1st of August, 1809, and the second on the 30th of March, 1811. Supposing, therefore, this Court were sitting at nisi prius, how would such evidence be received? And could the Court dictate the manner of its acting on the Bishop's conscience? If so much of the evidence on the part of the applicant was at least improbable, did it not shew that the Bishop might with more safety repose on the truth of his other information? So much might be said, if the Court were trying the fitness of the applicant, instead of the Bishop approving it but the Bishop had returned the applicant to the Court, by his affidavit, as generally unfit; and unless they should think themselves warranted in assuming a power which the Legislature had exclusively placed in the breast of another, in saying that the Bishop had not enquired, had not examined, and in calling for evidence and placing themselves in the Bishop's place, quoad the approval, they could not overturn his refusal. They were required to repeal an Act of Parliament, and violate a Bishop's conscience, Their refusal to grant the mandamus contravened no decision, and ran counter to no dictum of any one Judge who ever sat on the bench. The rule divided itself into two parts; the latter respecting the Arch

bishop of Canterbury, who had, no doubt, a function to exercise in such a case, and to whom it was doubtless competent to apply, but not inverso ordine. Taking into their consideration the returns of both the defendants to the rule, in which the Archbishop's name was only introduced in a late stage of the business, as the question was new, and not upon the Court's perfect satisfaction that his Grace's name ought to have been included, the Court, as to both defendants, discharged the Rule.

The Attorney-General asked for costs as to the Bishop, since the first rule as to him was discharged; and it was very hard that he should bear all the subsequent expense, in a case in which the Court had decided with him at first.

Lord Ellenborough said, that as this was the first case in which this very question had come before the Court, howsoever proper it might otherwise be, he was not inclined to give costs. Not so, if the question came again before the Court.

ELIAS CARPENTER.

6

AND this, unlike his rival, he,' &c. &c.—Page 157. Mr. Carpenter' will derive much advantage,' his friends say, if his conduct be contrasted with' the conduct of his opponent. The former has sacrificed,' it seems, every thing dear to mortal, and now, when past the prime of life, makes laborious exertions to support the cause he advocates; whilst the latter makes a property of his adherents. The former has been unchangeable, as the truths he so zealously espouses; whilst the latter displayed an extraordinary degree of inconsistency and instability.' Upwards of eight years past, we find, the latter person even mustered up the assurance to confront such as could not, and would not, read his name and appointment in the 5th and 6th verses of the last Chapter of Malachi !'

J. S. C. F. FREY.

.

DOCTOR Herschel addressed two Exhortations to his Brethren,' &c.-Page 169.

The Jews in London expressed their determination to oppose the attempt made by the Missionary Society for the instruction of the Jewish Children in the proposed Free School. The presiding Rabbi, usually called their High Priest, delivered two public discourses on this subject; abstracts from which have been printed in Hebrew and English, and circulated among the Jews.

Abstract of an Exhortation delivered by the Rev. Solomon Herschel, at the Great Synagogue, Duke's Place, on Saturday, Jan. 3, A. M. 5567.

Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the House of Israel; therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.-Ezek. iii. 17.

"The Prophet is here properly entitled a watchman, who is in duty bound to declare his prophetic inspiration, and is guilty of death if he withholds it. The Lord charges him likewise with the duty of a watchman, who is to be on the look-out, as one standing guard on a tower, whence he may readily see any

danger approaching to the city; and, by his warning voice, save it from harm.

"Thus it is the duty of him who is placed at the head of the house of Israel, to have a watchful eye over occurrences of the times, and to calculate their consequences; so that any circumstance arising, however excellent it may appear at the time, yet if he perceive therein any distant danger, which may in the course of time break out, and make its end prove bitter, however sweet it seemed at the beginning,-it then becomes his bounden duty to declare and forewarn the people, as much so as if God had actually sent him on such a particular mission; in order that they may not blindly fall into a snare, like the deluded bird, who, whilst joyously feasting on the corn, is unwittingly caught in the net.

"I have placed thee as a watchman to the house of Israel;" i. e. to look out on all occurrences, and foresee their effects. "Hear the word at my mouth;" i. e. understand by the gift of comprehension given to you, all matters which shall come to your ears; and if you foresee any evil likely to follow from them unto the` house of Israel, do not hesitate, but boldly "give them warning from me;" i. e. you have my authority so to do, and to speak in my name.

"Now, behold, it has pleased the Lord to direct me hither from afar, and placed me the Keeper of his Vineyard; I must, therefore, send forth my voice. Attend, O ye children of Israel! A new matter has appeared from a set of benevolent Gentlemen, of the Christian persuasion, who have proposed to open a Free School for the benefit of the Jewish Children, of both