SUNDAY SCHOOLS AT CUTTACK.-The annual sermons for the Oriya and English Sunday Schools, Cuttack, were preached on Lord's-day, Dec. 28th. Doli Patra, one of our young native ministers, preached in Oriya in the afternoon from Proverbs iv. 7, "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom." Dr. Buckley preached in the evening in English from "Feed my lambs." Collections a little more than 120 rupees (£12). A WATCH-NIGHT SERVICE was held at Cuttack, commencing at eleven o'clock and continuing for an hour. It was a solemn service and was numerously attended. Dr. Buckley presided, and prayer was offered by Dr. Wenger, of Calcutta, Dr. Stewart and Mr. Bond. The last five minutes of the year was spent in silent meditation, and when the clock had struck twelve, "Come let us anew our journey pursue" was very heartily sung. AUXILIARY MISSION.-On New Year's day the annual sermon for the Native Christian Auxiliary Mission was preached by Babu Shem Sahu, from "There remaineth yet very much land to be possessed," on the great work before us, and the way it should be done. Collection 44 rupees (£4 88.) MARRIAGE. At the Mission Chapel, Cuttack, on the 15th January, 1880, by Dr Buckley, Robert William Munro, eldest son of John Macmillan, Esq., to Eliza Ann daughter of J. A. Beale, Esq. Foreign Letters Received. Received on account of the General Baptist Missionary Society from January 16th, Subscriptions and Donations in aid of the General Baptist Missionary Society will be thankfully received by W. B. BEMBRIDGE, Esq., Ripley, Derby, Treasurer; and by the Rev. W. HILL, Secretary, Crompton Street, Derby, from whom also Missionary Boxes, Collecting Books and Cards may be obtained. The Political Crisis. THE crisis has come at last, and not come one minute too soon. Whatever may be the fate of the Beaconsfield Ministry, it was, undeniably, high time this Parliament "of Bible and Beer" was sent about its business. It has been the worst Parliament this century has seen. It has tamely submitted to be ignored and discredited, in a manner and to a degree, which indicates an utter want of moral force. The action of Eli's sons is a censure on Eli's domestic government; and the tricks of the Obstructionists form as heavy a condemnation of Parliament as it could receive. Another Parliament like it, if such a fearful calamity is to overtake us, will go far to annihilate parliamentary government, and to reduce the House of Commons to a chamber for registering the deeds of ministers, and a theatre for the display of ministerial incapacity. We are glad the Parliament is gone, and are only sorry it has lived so long, and wrought such mighty mischief. It is significant that the Government of Beer should be drowned in Water. But that is the fact. The Water-Supply Bill of Mr. Cross was too huge a "job" even for the much enduring Tories to accept. They have deplored it, and denounced it. The Globe said, "It looks as if the determined and universal opposition of the public had scared the Home Secretary into a disposition to let the matter drop. There would be no harm done if in letting it drop the question could be replaced exactly where it was before. But that is impossible. The mischief is done. Speculation has run riot, and the evil which it was specially designed to guard against has been witnessed in its most aggravated and intense form." It means something, that a Government which has given itself so absorbingly to work out of sight, in the far off wilds of South Africa, and the mountain-fastnesses of Central Asia, should scarcely begin to attack any serious business at home, and within sight, without falling suddenly into a miserable fiasco. Surely nothing becomes the Cabinet in life like "their way of leaving it." And now what is the story with which this feeble and discredited Government goes to the country? They have had six years of nearly undisturbed rule. What do those years say for them? "Nearly undisturbed rule," I say. For though their measures have been greedily accepted by a complacent majority, yet one notable and salutary check was put upon their movements in connection with the almost forgotten Bulgarian Atrocities. Led by Mr. Gladstone, the Nonconformity of England prevented Lord Beaconsfield from making us the allies of depraved and decrepit Turkey in a war against Russia. Apart from that, the Government have had it all their own way, and they have wrought their will upon us, and upon the world, with most disastrous results. Financially, all must admit, they have ignobly failed. Their policy has been unsound and cowardly, not to say ruinous. Even the Times, which taxes all its malignant ingenuity to write Mr. Gladstone down, said, Feb. 13, 1874:— GENERAL BAPTIST MAGAZINE, APRIL, 1880.-Vol. LXXXII.-N. S. No. 124. “During Mr. Gladstone's tenure of office the country has been wonderfully prosperous; money has been forthcoming for all sorts of enterprises; the people have lived well and spent correspondingly, and the revenue shows an elasticity marvellous in the eyes of Europe. Whoever may have been the author of the Gladstone Cabinet's Budgets, they have been framed with a sufficient knowledge of the relative productiveness of taxes, the flow of commerce, and the most abundant springs of national wealth. The Gladstone Government leaves an overflowing exchequer. There is a surplus of five millions; and a moral certainty that, if taxes to that amount were taken off, there would still be a surplus next year, owing to the regular progress of the country. Mr. Disraeli and his friends will find the house in perfect order, and a magnificent revenue to maintain it. The Gladstone Government has been a successful Government, and it has kept and left the country great and prosperous." Is it possible to say anything like that of Mr. Disraeli's Government? It is notorious that Mr. Gladstone had a surplus, in the five years of his rule, in all of £16,451,436. Sir Stafford Northcote has never had a surplus; and in his six years has exceeded his income by £10,538,207. Nay more, the Tory expenditure for five years has exceeded the Liberal five by £46,643,424, or nearly TEN MILLIONS A YEAR. "Yes," say they; "but see what unprecedented expenses we have had. Look at the Afghan War; the Zulu War; and our Continental Complications." We do look at them; and maintain that these "complications" have been caused by the vain and blustering policy of our Government; and that if the Liberals had been in power we should have had a far higher moral ascendancy in Europe, no "complications," and no wars. The money has been worse than wasted! Nor is the Home Legislation in any department more hopeful. Is there an observant man in the kingdom who will say that the Religious Worship Bill did the slightest good? Is "Ritualism stamped out?" Has it ceased to spread? Are the young clergy all becoming "Evangelicals?" The contrary is flagrantly the case, and the measure has proved to be as inoperative as it was absurd. Have we lost sight of the reactionary and base Regimental Exchanges Bill, by which they did all that was possible to re-introduce the iniquitous system of Purchase in the Army? Were not the Scotch Patronage Bill, the Endowed Schools Bill, attempts to give "ascendency"-that's the "word"-I thank thee for that word, my Lord Beaconsfield,-" ascendency" to an ecclesiastical class? Is not the Artizan's Dwelling Bill unworkable; the Agricultural Holdings Bill a solemn farce; and the Water-Supply Bill a "job?" Could anything better be said of the purchase of the Suez Canal Shares, of the Abortive Fugitive Slave Circulars, of the retention of the “cat” in the Army and Navy, of their treatment of game? Never had a - British Government a more beggarly account of domestic legislation to give than that of Lord Beaconsfield. It is so bad that even he is ashamed to refer to it. But it is in its Foreign Policy the Tory Government is strong. Well, what has it done? Lord Hartington justly says, "They did not prevent, even if their policy did not cause, a war in the East of Europe. The ascendency of England has been claimed in circulars, but it has THE POLITICAL CRISIS. 123 been surrendered in secret conventions." They bragged and blustered about the integrity of Turkey, and cut her in pieces. They talked about a frontier for Greece; but Greece has obtained nothing; and the Eastern Question is as 'eternal" as ever. Into Afghanistan they have ruthlessly carried chaos, ruin, and death; and now, like Marius at Carthage, our soldiers sit amid the memorials of desolation. 66 This is the account a Government has to give of itself in asking to be re-elected, so that it may secure "the power, if not the ascendency, of England in the councils of Europe." Why have they not done this in the past? When the Liberals were in power, and Belgium was threatened, during the Franco-German War, the Liberal Government successfully protected Belgium, with quiet dignity and firmness; but this Government of bluster and blindness "protects" Turkey, and then hands over her dominions to her foes. Where is Bosnia? What has become of Herzegovina? etc. Turkey cries, now it is too late, "Save me from my friends." But to say nothing of the present state of the fleet; of the "falsehoods" of Salisbury, the "prevarications" of Beaconsfield, the letter of Cranbrook to Northbrook to make a case for an attack on Afghanistan, the purchase of the Suez Canal Shares, at a cost of several millions, without consulting Parliament, the deportation of Native Indian Troops to fight England's battles without the sanction of the House of Commons, the making and signing treaties without the knowledge or consent of the representatives of the people; and much besides of like character; we maintain that the manifesto of Lord Beaconsfield, is itself sufficient to rouse every patriot to do his utmost to abolish for ever such a Cabinet as that "lives and moves and has its being" in Lord Beaconsfield. Look at it. Judge its false issues: its unmanly insinuations: its corrupt morality. It is as full of deception as an egg of meat. There is more mischief to Britain lurking in that “ tricky" letter than in all the armies of the world. What would you think if Bismarck claimed an ascendency for Germany in the councils of Europe? What did we think when Napoleon the First claimed it? We said, he should not have it; and Waterloo sealed our refusal. "Ascendency in the councils of Europe" is no nation's right: and it is wrong and mischievous to seek it. We can only live happily and prosperously as we are a brotherhood of nations, in which the interests of all is supreme, and no one is allowed to dictate to and control the rest. But you do not waste words on a mountebank; nor ought it to be necessary to reason against the false and injurious tricks of a selfseeking political charlatan. Rather let us take care that Some Liberals are despondent. We do not wholly regret it. There is ground for it, and we must not underrate the strength of our foes. Several gigantic forces are arrayed against us. Beer is almost omnipotent. The publicans are prepared to elect M. P.'s solely as servants to their trade. Patriotism is drowned in the beer barrel. "Brag" is almost as mighty as "beer." The policy of bluster is congenial to not a few minds. Even persons of intelligence and discrimination are afflicted with "Russophobia," and are dazed enough to imagine that the Beaconsfield policy, which has aggrandized Russia more than any other operative cause for the last quarter of a century, is the one panacea for the ills of Europe. Vested interests and class privileges are abetted by Toryism, and in the army, navy, &c., they are intensely potent. Ecclesiastical ascendency is coveted by the clergy, and it is threatened by Liberals. Then we failed at Southwark and Liverpool, and therefore we are despondent. But let us fight the more heroically, and put out every pound of strength we have. Duty is not measured by success and our duty is clear. Our principles as Liberal politicians are at stake. Our interests as patriots are threatened, and with profoundest sorrow we say it, our character for justice, for fairness, and for love of freedom is imperilled. We must fight for the victory of Liberalism. No duty at this moment takes precedence of it. It is first and last, and whether we win or lose, every Christian man and woman (yes, and woman too,) is bound to do his, or her, utmost to secure the triumph of the principles of righteousness, peace, and of good government. And let us fight wisely. There must be no rivalry amongst Liberals; and no coldness if the only Liberals we can get to represent us are, in some cases, men of inferior calibre, of inadequate training, and defective gifts. We battle for PRINCIPLES; and whether they are in an earthern pot or a golden vessel is not just now the question. Our great question is, Are the principles there? if so, that must decide us. Let us have no sectional cries. The Tories will spend any money to effect a division in the Liberal ranks, and to start and support men who will be "independent," "vivisectionist," "anti-vaccinationist," or anything else, so that they may detach our votes. Do not let us suffer ourselves to be blindfolded through our convictions on minor questions. The supreme duty is to change the Government, and everything should be made subordinate thereto. Fellow-citizens, Christians of Britian, you are come to the kingdom for such a time as this! Be brave, devoted, and unflagging, in your zeal; and may the God of humanity defend the right! JOHN CLIFFORD. It is well with the Child. LOVE yearns to claim the little ones, O! could we see those little ones We should not say with tears-They died, So heaven itself would be less fair Then wonder not that little ones And we have heard him say— E. HALL JACKSON. |