place, saw fit, in a printed "Address to the Constituents of Airedale College," to cast on the Unitarian body. After giving in the Address a brief history of Dissenting Academies, he had subjoined in a note these words: "The Author has not referred to the self-styled Unitarian academies. He confines himself to Christianity. Such could, therefore, have no more claim to a place in this catalogue than a school of Confucius in China, or the College of Dervishes in Ispahan." Not satisfied with unchristianizing Unitarians in this summary and insulting manner, he had, in another passage, impeached their character as men of integrity and honor, and, alluding, it is understood, to the conduct of Lady Hewley's trustees, had pronounced them, in terms and without discrimination, guilty of "rapine" and "felony."

We admire the clearness, ability, and Christian spirit, with which Dr. Hutton repels these atrocious charges. His "Sermon," which we are happy to find has been published by the American Unitarian Association in their series of tracts, contains an unanswerable defence of the position, that all who as disciples submit themselves in good faith to the instructions of Christ as a Teacher come from God, are entitled to the name of Christian. In the "Letter" appended to the "Sermon," and in the "Four Letters" afterwards addressed to Mr. Hamilton, he pursues that writer with great acuteness, somewhat playful and keen at times, but always urbane and forbearing, through all his ill-digested and passionate declamation, and proves the imputations which he had attempted to fasten on Unitarians indiscriminately, to be as groundless as they were unprovoked and wanton. Mr. Hamilton in his "Reply" and "Animadversions" evinces considerable adroitness and talent, and great liveliness of imagination and command of language, but withal a flippancy and recklessness of statement, and an impertinent dogmatism, which, so far as we are at liberty to make up a judgment from his publicacations in this controversy, bring into serious question his character, not only as a Christian, but as an honest man. Alluding to this country in his usual contemptuous manner, he is pleased to say that "republican fame is as cheap as its institutions"; but we can assure him that if any writer worth noticing amongst us should so decidedly plant himself in the kennel, and begin the work of aspersing his betters, he would be put under ban in all good society.

Much of this controversy relates, as has been intimated before, to a question of local interest merely, the bestowment of Lady Hewley's fund. Part of the proceeds of this charity, according to the terms of the bequest, is to be given to "godly ministers of Christ's holy Gospel"; and the trustees, a majority of whom happen to be Unitarians, have thought proper to give it to "godly ministers of Christ's holy Gospel" indiscriminately, whether Unitarian or Trinitarian. The legality of their conduct in this respect has been disputed, and the suit has gone into chancery, pending which it is a satisfaction to know that not a shadow of just suspicion rests on the upright and honorable intentions of our brethren in England, whether right in their understanding of the law or not. The information given in the following extract from Dr. Hutton's "Four Letters" may be of use in correcting false impressions industriously circulated in this country.

6

"On these charges of 'disgusting faithfulness and shameful liberality,' to use your own expressions, it would be perfectly needless for me to say a single word, to those who know any thing of the personal characters of the gentlemen whom you thus attack, and of some of whom, I should have thought, you might yourself have known, that they could not have been parties to such conduct as you impute. ''The gentlemen of Dissenting persuasions who form the body of trustees,' said Lord Brougham, in a judgment which he delivered on a part of this case, are some of them well known to the profession of the law as able and skilful lawyers, others as respectable inhabitants of the West-Riding of Yorkshire, who, no doubt, have acted on this, as on all other occasions, in the most conscientious manner.' 'I beg to be understood,' he likewise observed, in the course of the same judgment, 'that I am the farthest in the world from casting any censure, or forming any harsh opinion, on the conduct of those worthy persons, the trustees, or of Mr. Wellbeloved, one of the most virtuous, pious, and learned men, who, I will venture to say, adorn any church.' And what say the commissioners for inquiring concerning charities, of the conduct of these trustees, after a particular investigation of it? After a full statement of the general mode in which the affairs of the charity are conducted, and its funds applied, they thus conclude - ' and it does not appear to us, on inquiry into the administration, and examination of the books of accounts, &c. that the trusts are otherwise than duly performed, in all essential particulars, unless it is to be considVOL. XIII. -N. S. VOL. VIII. NO. 111. 51

ered a departure from Lady Hewley's intention, that part of the revenues should be applied in favor of Dissenting ministers, who entertain and preach Socinian or Unitarian doctrines of faith, or in the allowance of stipends to the widows of such ministers, and exhibitions to students brought up in those sentiments,' &c. On this last-mentioned point the commissioners not only suggest a doubt, but also subsequently give it as their opinion that the question ought to be submitted to the decision of a court of equity. They do not, however, in any respect impeach the conduct of the trustees, or throw out the slightest suspicion of intentional malversation on their part." pp. 98, 99.

We also give part of the answer of the Trustees themselves to the Attorney General's information, made under oath.

"These defendants say that, as trustees of the said charity, they are willing and desirous to act under the directions of this honorable court, but they humbly submit that they ought not to be removed from being trustees and managers of the said charity; for these defendants insist that they were duly appointed, according to the directions contained in the original deeds of trust of the said Dame S. Hewley, and they say that, since the periods of their appointment respectively, they have severally, conscientiously, and to the best of their ability, acted in the execution of the trusts of the said charity. - And these defendants say, that the said Dame S. Hewley did not, in the said original deeds of trust, or in her rules for the management of the said hospital, or in any other documents, to the best of their knowledge or belief, give any directions regarding the peculiar mode of belief, required to be entertained by the objects of the said charities, save that, according to the rules of the said almshouse, the alms-women are required to be of the Protestant religion; and these defendants say that, according to the best of their judgment and belief, the desire and intention of the said Dame S. Hewley, in founding the charity, was to encourage the preaching and practice of pure Christianity, without any exclusive regard either to the peculiar forms of Protestant Dissenting worship, or to the particular doctrines inculcated by the different denominations or sects of Protestant Dissenters. And these defendants say that it hath not been their practice to inquire what were the particular personal religious opinions of the applicants for the assistance of the said charity, but that their inquiries have been always made with a view to ascertain, as to the preachers, whether they were sufficiently learned to read and understand the holy Scriptures, and were men of such godly character and conduct, as were likely, in their lives, as well as by their preaching, to promote Christ's Holy Gospel, and were in such circumstances as to require pecuniary assistance from the said charity. And these defendants say that so far is it from being true, as alleged in the said information, that they have shown an undue preference to the Dissenters commonly called Unitarians, that they say they have ascertained from inquiries made since the said information was filed, and they believe it to be true, that a very great majority of the preachers and widows, who receive stipends from the funds of the said charity, are what are commonly called Trinitarian Dissenters, and not what are commonly called Unitarians." - pp. 99, 100.

Dr. Hutton states his reasons at some length for rejecting the name Socinian.

"Even Lord Chancellor Brougham," he tells us, "whose studies, - wonderfully multifarious and profound as they have been, - have not probably included much of theology, has discovered that the term Socinian is generally meant to give offence, and used as a 'bad name,' which, you know, we ought not to give to any animal. If the question,' said he, in a judgment which he lately delivered in the Court of Chancery, and which you have probably seen, had been - Are you a Socinian or not - are your writings and your doctrines Socinianism or not are your congregations persons holding Socinian opinions or not? - I could easily imagine that the Rev. Mr. Wellbeloved and others connected with him might have a great objection to giving answers to such questions, because Socinianism, or what is called the heresy of Socinus, is what no professors ought to be charged with - it is' - (here his Lordship makes a little excursion out of our English dictionary, in which you will not, I think, object to accompany him) -'dyslogistic, it is vituperative - it is unfair - it is not, I believe, applicable to the Unitarians, or to their doctrine, and therefore a man might object to the question, as a trap, or indeed an indignity.' We are much obliged to his Lordship for granting us the protection of the Court." p. 56.

It is not, however, on this account that Dr. Hutton objects to the name, but because the term is not truly descriptive of that class of Unitarians who believe in the simple humanity of Jesus Christ, and is totally inapplicable to Arians. He therefore requests Mr Hamilton, if he cannot conscientiously call us Unitarians, to invent some other appropriate appellation for the whole body of those who hold that the Father alone is the supreme God. Referring to those who believe in the simple humanity of our Lord, he adds in a note :

"I had thought of suggesting the epithet Humanitarians for this section of our body, but find that the sensitive feelings of yours might be wounded by our appropriation of it. 'We heard a minister of some repute in Mr. Hamilton's connexion,' says a reviewer in the 'Monthly Repository' for January, 'exclaim, "They call themselves Humanitarians, forsooth! as if every Trinitarian did not also believe in the true and proper humanity of Jesus Christ."" It would really seem as if all the good names were preoccupied, and our opponents would leave us none but the nick-names to make our choice from. No sooner do we express a predilection for any particular appellation, than some one cries out, 'That's ours' - or, We have a right to that.' We should be under a great obligation to any one who would discover for us a good descriptive name, to which no one could urge either a claim or an objection." - р. 61.

So then we are reduced to the necessity of advertising for a name. Perhaps we had better make a virtue of necessity, adopt the policy recommended by some of our friends, and forswear all names. Seriously, however, in our humble judgment there has been a great deal too much higgling and wrangling about names on both sides. It is not generally understood in regard to the common appellation of a party, except perhaps by the party adopting it, that it is accurately descriptive of their sentiments or practices; otherwise Mr. Hamilton's own denomination would have again to go under the nickname, we suppose he would call it, of Anabaptists. We claim, as a sect, to be called Unitarians, or Liberal Christians, or simply Christians, on the same ground on which we are ready to call any other sect Orthodox, or Catholics, or Baptists, who choose to be thus designated. Those who, like Mr. Hamilton, have not the magnanimity or the justice or the good sense to acknowledge the force of this argument, will not probably acknowledge the force of any other.