1851. Mr. Cochrane and Lord Minto. 525 'sent. The people rose and cheered Lord Minto, when the "arch-agitator, the modern Rienzi, -Ciceroacchio, entered his 'box, and was welcomed by the English Minister.' (P.75.) Before touching on the facts of the case, we assure Mr. Cochrane that there is no Théâtre d'Apollon' at Rome-an Italian City where they speak Italian: there they call Teatro d'Apollo' what the French translate Théâtre d'Apollon.' Mr. Cochrane occasionally writes French, just as his prototype spoke prose, without knowing it. At page 87., mistaking French for Italian, he puts some familiar French phrases into the Pope's mouth upon addressing the Prince of Teano, one of his Ministers. As to the facts of the case, we beg to inform Mr. Cochrane that if he had asked well-informed and educated gentlemen instead of inquiring of the valets de place, he would have learnt that the procession of which he speaks, far from being a procession of all that was most democratic,' was a most striking pageant, to which the splendid State equipages and the gorgeous liveries of the highest Roman Nobility gave that dignity of aristocratic magnificence seldom, if ever, equalled out of Rome. The statement that Ciceroacchio entered Lord Minto's box, and that he was welcomed by his Lordship, is as true as the rest of Mr. Cochrane's nursery tales. It is as true, for instance, as what Mr. Cochrane says a little further on (p. 78.): - On that 'same 1st of January, a deputation, consisting of Sterbini, Canino, and Massi, had an interview with His Holiness.' Instead of Sterbini, Canino, and Massi, read Corsini (the Senator of Rome), who, in fact, waited on the Pope on the 1st, and Doria and Borghese, who waited on him on the 2nd. Mr. Cochrane's informant must have been a wag who, seeing how much terrified that gentleman was by the names of Sterbini and Co., amused himself by frightening him out of his propriety in which he fully succeeded. 6 Mr. Cochrane, that Arbiter elegantiarum, has ventured to say of Lord Minto, that he wrote like the paid hireling of a party (p. 76). Such language is worthy of the book in which it appears; and in order to show that its author deserves equal credit for his candour and for his taste, we shall give one more extract from his Young Italy.' It runs thus: - The events of that memorable day [the 1st of January, 1848] are described by Lord Minto in the following dispatch: "LORD MINTO TO LORD PALMERSTON, JAN. 13, 1848. "The new year has opened inauspiciously, with twenty-four "hours' uneasiness, and ill humour, produced by ill-advised proceedings on the part of the authorities at an imaginary ""danger." No paid hireling of a party could have written in 6.66 a more partizan spirit.' Any one would conclude, from Mr. Cochrane's words, that the whole dispatch consisted of the above few lines; whereas it fills more than one page and a half of the Blue Book (Affairs of Italy, part 2nd, p. 39.). Lord Minto, in his real dispatch, gives a detailed account of the events that passed under his own eyes. Mr. Cochrane not only suppresses this account, but conveys the impression that it never existed, and substitutes that of his valet de place. Not satisfied with thus misleading his readers, he cannot help turning into bad English the correct language of Lord Minto. The passage stands thus in the Blue Book: The new year opened here inauspi'ciously with four-and-twenty hours of uneasiness and ill-humour, produced by ill-advised proceedings on the part of the public authorities against an imaginary danger.' There are no italics; Lord Minto does not speak of proceedings at,' but of 'proceedings against.' In fact, he writes English. We can forgive Mr. Cochrane mistaking French for Italian and being ignorant of both; but as to English and chiefly as to a gentleman's English-we would say to him in Cicero's words:Non enim tam præclarum est scire Latine, quam turpe nescire; neque tam id mihi oratoris boni, quam civis Romani proprium videtur. Having done with Mr. Cochrane, we beg to return, before concluding, to our main subject. - We confidently hope that the publication of the above facts relating to the Neapolitan Courts and Police will have due weight with His Sicilian Majesty, to whom, we are willing to believe, they are unknown. It concerns the honour of his Crown as well as his own, to put an end to practices unworthy of him as a Christian, a king, and a man. We hope also that such conservative powers as are not pledged to foster Red Republicanism and Socialism, and to systematise injustice, unfairness, brutality, and plunder, will condemn as immoral, as well as impolitic, a system of government which seems invented for the annihilation of virtue and of truth, in order to insure the momentary triumph of crime and of falsehood; and, eventually, to render the very name of Monarchy hateful to the world. We implore men of all parties, of all nations, of all creeds to raise an unanimous and unmistakeable cry of abhorrence in the name of outraged humanity against deeds to which pagan tyranny, oriental despotism, and African ferocity can hardly find a parallel.* We were painfully surprised at finding recently in a highly influential publication what appeared to be apologies for the conduct of the Neapolitan Government, and the natural tendency of which 1851. The Anglo-Catholic Theory. 527 бытий ART. VIII.—1. The two-fold Protest. A Letter from the Duke A SHORT year has elapsed since the Pope startled the whole undoubtedly must be to encourage that Government to persist in its barbarous course. It is stated that a person who had made inquiries at Naples, avows 'it to be his opinion, that Poerio was guilty of the 'charges brought against him, of conspiring against the state, and that he did form part of a secret political society for that purpose, though he denied belonging to the association termed the "Unità Italiana."' The question is: was Poerio proved to belong to this society? It is also said, 'that the loose and rambling style of Poerio's ' own defence, accompanied as it is with certain avowals of his 'opinions for the reconstruction of Italy, by no means establishes his 'innocence.' Nothing can, in our opinion, be more pithy than Poerio's defence, dated the 8th February, 1850. The Conclusioni, or speech of the Attorney-General against him, being of December of the same year are, therefore, subsequent to that defence the only one of which we have ever heard, and which Poerio wrote impromptu, at the moment of his constituto, before he knew what the AttorneyGeneral might urge against him. The avowal of his opinions is a proof of his innocence; if guilty of that of which he was accused, he would not have made a parade of opinions which it was his interest to conceal. Ostensibly, Poerio was not tried and condemned for his opinions, nor was it for him to establish his innocence, but for the accusers to establish his guilt. Poerio did show that the chief witness brought against him, Jervolino, was a government spy, and that he was perjured; and on this most important point Mr. Gladstone distinctly states, that he heard that man's evidence canvassed at the trial, and that from what he himself heard he had no doubt that Jervolino was guilty of perjury. This is not relying on Poerio's defence only, as Mr. Gladstone is accused of having done by those who cannot have had the same means of judging of the credibility of this Jervolino, the main witness; neither can they have seen more of the evidence on which Poerio and the others were convicted than such extracts as the Government has thought proper to publish; yet it is on these slight and unsatisfactory grounds that the misery of those unhappy men is likely to be aggravated; and this too, when at the same time the possibility of Poerio having been unfairly con which it created has produced some important results, and seems destined to produce more. The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill has become the law of the land: and we wait to learn from experience what effects it will have in repelling the aggression of the Pope. But it meets a part only, and that the smallest part, of the ecclesiastical dangers which beset the country. The storm which last autumn raged in so many public meetings was the outburst of a feeling of dissatisfaction and alarm long pent up, of a sense of danger within our lines, which had been rendering the country for a considerable period restless and unhappy. On every side there broke forth fierce denunciations against a treason which was betraying the Established Church of England. In the insolence and advances of the foreign invader men saw proofs of confidence in the disorganisation of the garrison he was attacking. It was a grievous thing to find the Pope re-asserting his hated dominion over this free land: but it was far more irritating to discover that he was cheered on by incessant defections of the defenders of that Church which our ancestors had raised to protect us from his assaults. Shame, fear, and anger convulsed the minds of the English nation: and these emotions found frequent vent in language suited to their intensity. And what have been the results? Has the awakened consciousness of danger led to the repairing of our defences, to the restoring the fidelity of our troops, to the taking adequate securities against further defections? Is the position of the Church of England safer and sounder than it was a year ago? Is there less danger of the clergy becoming deserters to the Pope? Are the causes which have produced these secessions weakened or removed? Have the people of this country ground for thinking that her pastors will no longer be the very men who shall seduce their flocks to Rome? These are questions of fearful interest: it deeply concerns all to ascertain what has been, or can be, done. victed is admitted. If it be doubtful whether he has been fairly convicted, can there be any doubt that he ought not to have been condemned? True, the barbarity of the punishment is disapproved ́of, and yet it is observed, in extenuation, that Poerio is not chained day and night to a common malefactor as has been alleged.' No one had ever alleged this but Macfarlane, who invented the allegation for the purpose of contradicting it. The cruelty of the punishment consists in keeping two human beings chained day and night together; were they brothers or the most intimate friends, it is an indecent and revolting cruelty: no more than this was ever alleged; and this never has been or can be denied. The letter inserted above, from 'The Examiner,' proves what sort of treatment the prisoners receive at Ischia, whatever may be stated to the contrary. 1851. Popery to be met by Faith in Protestantism. 529 The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill is the sole tangible product of the excitement. It is obvious that it gives no protection against conversions to the Church of Rome. It is a measure of selfdefence against aggression from without by a foreign Power,-a protest by which the nation vindicates its right to be the sole dispenser of honours and titles within its own limits: it is simply a repulse of an attack on the sovereignty and independence of the country. As against the religion of Rome it says and does nothing at all. It will not prevent a single conversion which, without it, would have taken place. The causes which swell the ranks of the Romanists with seceders from the English pale are left untouched by it: it is levelled against the political action only of the Papal Court. On the other hand, no attempt has been made to cure the Church of England of the malady which is consuming her. A demonstration of feeling has been made. It can no longer be said, though the prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule through their means, that my people love to have it so.' The people of England have manifested, with impassioned warmth, the depth and soundness of their Protestant faith: and some amount of discouragement and repression may be produced by this exhibition of sentiment. But it would be a fatal mistake to suppose that the progress of Popery can be arrested by the tumultuous cheers of excited numbers. The Church of Rome knows when to oppose, and when to bend before the storm. Her faith is on the end. patience is not to be wearied out by delay or disappointment, and no violence can subdue her activity. Her policy is infinite in resources. She knows how to subjugate nations by a single sweep of power, or to undermine them by an incessant stream of individual conversions. If Rome is to be driven back, she must be assailed in her fundamental principles: she must be met by a full and brave counter-assertion of the truth. We must have faith in Protestantism: we must appreciate its principles and embrace them thoroughly, or we are lost. This our Protestantism, however, has been shaken-shaken in its hold on the affections and understandings of the clergy. It is openly repudiated by many others, who have not quite cast it away in their hearts, are ashamed to confess it before men: it is held feebly, and still more feebly avowed. Her Do then, we ask, the events of the past year furnish us with any brighter hope for the future? We have indeed chased away some of the anxieties which pressed upon our imaginations. We have learned that the people of England are Protestant still. This is something: for there is always an advantage gained by dissipating an imaginary prestige of success. |