England carrying on a trade that has any value? If the Hindoo is likely to undersell us eventually in his own markets, is not the same thing to be feared of the Americans in regard to most of the commodities in producing which the English have hitherto excelled ? Is not Belgium underselling us in the manufacture of iron, and are not Prussian guns more in demand than English ? England, in fact, has been for long educating the rest of the world in the art of manufacture, and must expect that some of her pupils will learn in time to do without their teacher. But that is hardly a complete view of our trade relations with India, which considers only the smaller part--our export trade-and leaves out of sight the much larger trade in the commodities which we import from that country. Some idea of the magnitude of that trade, and of the interests involved in it, may be gathered from a cursory glance at the daily newspaper, where whole columns of advertisements appear of steamers and ships sailing to India. Consider, too, the number of mercantile houses and banks engaged in the India trade, and the multitude of people in various capacities who gain their livelihood, indirectly as well as directly, in connection with these fleets and these great establishments. And this, after all, would be a very inadequate view of the matter. For, as the late Mr. Cairnes observed in one of bis essays, one might as well measure the advantages of learning by the salaries paid to the teachers, as measure the benefit which foreign trade confers on a country by the profits of the agents who carry it on. The real benefit of foreign trade to a country is surely that it is supplied in this way with things at a cheaper price than that at which they can be produced within the country, or with things which it cannot produce at all. The great difference in the nature of the products of India and England has hitherto constituted the special value of the trade between the two countries. It is unnecessary even to mention the commodities in the production of which India has almost a monopoly, but in addition she is now becoming able to supply various articles of home production on equal terms. This branch of Indian trade, indeed, is advancing with such rapid strides as to even threaten to affect seriously the conditions of English agriculture; and although there may still be some people who regard the competition of the foreign producer as an evil, probably most persons in these days are satisfied that the real interests of the population of this country are best advanced when all their wants are supplied from the cheapest markets. Mr. Lowe says that whereas the Romans would have drawn thirty millions per annum from India, the English Government does not draw a single penny. The English Government does not, but the English people does, draw a great deal more than thirty millions a year from India, yet this increase to their wealth is not obtained at the expense of India, which is enriched by an intercourse mutually profitable to both sides.

A word must be added about the field of employment offered to Englishmen by the Indian public service. The state of the case in telegraphs, and all marks of English occupation, with the total cessation of foreign trade. But let us charitably hope that before the desolation occurs, which would otherwise follow when the English retire from India, Russia vr some other Power may step in to take our place, and avert some part of the consequences which must otherwise fall on the unfortunate people of that country. Yet in pursuing the subject so far we are passing the bounds of sober speculation ; for of all wild political fancies, that of the occupation of India by Russia, always supposing she has not the command of the sea, but must approach it through the steppes of Central Asia, is surely among the wildest. It is almost as extravagant as the conception of an in-lependent government of Bengal by Bengalees. And if Russia has the command of the sea England must have lost it, and with it of course the possession of India.

The considerations which have been here put forward will, it may be hoped, assist the reader towards forming a just estimate of the relative advantages and drawbacks involved in our possession of India. I have endeavoured to show that the supposed drain of men which that possession entails is in peace time quite inappreciable as compared with the effect of emigration. In time of war the case is different; the absence from Europe of 60,000 soldiers is an apparent loss, but apparent only, because there is no certainty that, if not wanted for India, they would not have emigrated, while it is small in comparison with the effective power of England if the English choose to make use of it. Admitting however the drawback, and also the contingent responsibility of being called on to defend a distant dependency, the question remains whether the enormous benefit resulting to England from its Indian trade-a trade the existence of which is wholly dependent on our occupation of the country--is worth the contingent risks involved. Considering that peace has happily been for many years our normal condition, and that our Indian trade has, during this long period, added enormously to the wealth and prosperity of the country, and therefore to its capacity for bearing the stress of war whenever it may come upon us :—if we weigh the good against the evil, and bear in mind moreover that this contingent risk is much smaller than that which we actually ran in the great struggle at the beginning of the century, when with less than half our present population we managed to defy Napoleon, and to win a great part of India at the same time; then, apart from all sentiments of pride, or honour, or patriotism, but looking at the matter simply as one of self-interest and prudent investment, there would seem to be no room for reasonable doubt on which side of the account the balance should be struck. To defend India might conceivably demand a great effort; to lose it must involve a shock that would vibrate through every section of English society, and would go far to work a calamitous revolution in the material condition of the English people.

GEORGE CHESNEY.

A ROMAN CATHOLIC VIEW OF

RITUALISM.

a

6

16

THERE is much which deserves to attract the regard of contemporary society, and to fix the attention of serious observers, in the singular phenomenon of religious revival which is termed Ritualism. It is, in fact, no ordinary phenomenon which has effected this spiritual regeneration in the heart of English Protestantism, by efforts coming from within, and by the action of Protestantism, reacting on itself. It offers matter for interesting observations of social psychology, and we doubt whether history affords many instances of a similar revival.

Sometimes, indeed, recurring to decadent ages, or to those which are on the eve of dissolution, we encounter peoples which are suddenly restored to life, which lift up their heads once more, recover their strength, and appear to renew their youth ; but when we look more closely, instead of pausing on the surface of history, and go on to examine the events themselves, and the causes which produce them, it always appears that the revival asserted to be spontaneous was simply the effect of external causes. “God,' says the Scripture, created the generations of the world healthful, but in order that a people may be healed, a medicine must be found, and this medicine must be sought outside of that people, since there is no instance of a sick man, who has reached a certain stage of prostration, being able to restore himself to life. Lazarus indeed left the grave, but before he issued from the sepulchre and resumed his place in his home at Bethany it was necessary for Christ to come to break open the tomb and release him from his bonds by uttering the words which restored him to life : Lazarus, come forth.' It is without precedent that the dead should restore themselves to life. When a nation is dead, it cannot live again; and when it is dying, it can only be rescued from the

grave by a kind of miracle.

Once, undoubtedly, the Roman Empire was seen to die, and then apparently to revive under a new form, in the hundred European nations which have preserved its laws and usages, but this was the case only in appearance: it is not really the social system of Rome whose day was over.

That social system gave way to the barbarous era

which supplanted it, and which gathered in the heritage of its predecessor, seeming to reanimate it, while it was in fact forming an entirely new society. It was a succession, not a resurrection; but this succession was, under the guidance of Providence, effected so naturally, that it was for some time possible to mistake it for an actual resurrection.

The Catholic Church alone appears to be endowed with the power of endless renewal, but this is because she does not in reality ever die. Peoples go and come into her bosom; they are born, increase, grow old, and die, and this leads to the belief among some men that the Catholic Church dies, although she is in fact ever the same, ever advancing, ever young, since God has made, and still preserves, her immortal. We see her beside the cradle of nascent peoples, and find her once more at the deathbed of nations which are coming to an end, and while the world is ever being renewed, she alone does not die. She is always the same, always endowed with a youthfulness which cannot fade, with a vitality which nothing can take from her, and thus it is that she never dies.

The sects, on the other hand, which separate from her, are subject to the conditions of human existence, and share the lot of earthly things. They are therefore no sooner detached from the stem whence they drew their divine life, than they begin to languish and decline, to become extinct and die; and just as there was a time when they did not exist, so the day comes when they are said to be no more.

Protestantism forms no exception to this law of history. Jesus Christ has pronounced its sentence of death in the parable of the vine, and we can already discern its fulólment. English Protestantism alone appears to contradict this general law; in what is called Ritualism, it seems at this moment to have found a fresh life, and to have recovered an appearance of youth, just when its dissolution was expected.

This phenomenon is certainly strange and unexpected. But it is still more strange that Protestantism, in coming to life, has everywhere excited, not merely surprise and astonishment, but indignation, anger, threats, and persecution. Ritualism is perhaps more offensive to English Protestants than Roman Catholicism, nor does it, on the other hand, find much more sympathy among Catholics. Protestants persecute the Ritualists, and wish to drive them out of their church; while Catholics decline to receive them, and repel them from the fold which they desire to enter.

This is a singular fate, and when events which are so intimately connected with the salvation of souls, with the future of a great people, and the prosperity of the Catholic Church ; when such events pas3 before our eyes, ought we not to accord to them a few moments' consideration, in order to ascertain their cause, and discover their explanation ? They contain more than one lesson, and we should be

a

wrong not to gather up the teaching which these contemporary facts afford. So at least it appears to me, and for this reason I wish to devote some pages to English Ritualism, to ascertain its strength, to show its weakness, and to predict its destiny.

I.

A religious system which has made such progress as Ritualism has made, in spite of the attacks directed against it, of the obstacles placed in its way, and of the legal prosecutions in which it has been involved, must indeed possess strong principles and elements of vitality. Nor is there any doubt that Ritualism is on the increase, and that its progress bas been remarkable, first in England, then in America, and finally in all the English colonies. It has been assailed on every side, at once by Protestants and Catholics; the former have threatened to extinguish it by the strong hand of the law, 'to put it down,' while the latter have admitted that the imputations made against it were just; and yet, in spite of contempt on the one hand, and persecution on the other, Ritualism advances. It advances, undaunted either by the blows which were inflicted yesterday, or by those which threaten on the morrow. Not long since, a law directed against Ritualism was passed, and all the vigour of the ancient laws was exhausted against its bravest representatives. This new law has been put in force; some clergy have been deprived of their livings, and the same fate is preparing for others; yet, in spite of all these alarming facts, and those yet more alarming which are still imminent, I repeat that Ritualism still advances, and advances with rapid strides.

Everything which enables us to trace the course of public opinion in England proves this truth beyond a doubt. The churches which are built are more ornate than formerly; the services are less cold, and better attended; church decorations take a more important place in worship; the display of religious sentiment in palpable and visible signs increases. And the rising tide is not limited to the members of the Anglican Church ; it has even extended to the dissenting communities, and to the Wesleyans in particular. This fact has of late been particularly apparent, and it has even conquered the citadel of ancient Protestantism, or what is called the Low Church, as well as the Broad Church.

Nowhere do we now find the negligence and dirt, the physical and moral torpor, the disregard of forms, which thirty years ago was almost universal among the religious communities of England. In London, for example, most of the churches which belong to the Established Church have unconsciously adopted ritualistic observances, and it is not one of the least curious and least consoling symptoms, Vol. III.--No. 12.

R