Showing 61 results

Archival description
Thirlwall, Newell Connop (1797–1875) bishop of St David's, historian
Print preview View:

2 results with digital objects Show results with digital objects

Letter from William Whewell

Cambridge University 'is a vile university and the vice chancellor is a damned vice chancellor. - But if possible I will waste no more time in exclamations and give you the facts - scene - Union debating Room - Time - six o'clock. - Knock at door - silence - enter the red round idiot head & turkey cock breast of Okes [William Okes] - Hon. gentlemen stare - enter the inflexibly meek countenance & proctorial smile of French [William French] - stare wider - Okes running himself against the table & addressing the president. "Vice Chancellor sent us to say he don't like these societies - all to go home". French "The Vice Chancellor desires you to disperse & to meet no more". - Pres. requests the messengers to withdraw that soc. may consider of it - "No - not a subject for your consideration - you must oblige" - so the vice chancellor dislikes these societies - but suppose we reject political subjects - will he let us discuss literary ones - "Can't say - no authority - but V.C. is in the house we will mention"[.] [Says] again "no societies at all to be allowed - all to disperse". But we must finish this meeting - we have financial matters - V.C. is here - you will let us send a deputation to him - Whewell - Thirlwall [Connop Thirlwall] - Sheridan [Charles B. Sheridan] - ushered into a room - V.C. in full silks - head white[,] face red & ugly. - Jackson in the background - Red nose of [Hornbuckle?] sticking across the room - and o sorrow & shame! Monk [James H. Monk] - (Why the devil - fool as he was - did he not let it be a Johnian business as it deserved to be) - "We are told you have an objection to our debates - want to know how far it goes - literary subjects?" "No sir - they are against the statutes - all meetings at regular times for the purpose of debate are - hum - haw - hum irregular - and you have only three years - you have other things to do - you take too much upon you - your knowledge[,] your reading[,] your minds are not proper food..." "I am afraid we are not to be allowed to consider the reasons - we must submit to the authority" A move at the word authority "But the case must have been exaggerated - two or three hours a week" "Sir I have had a letter from a person who once belonged to the society and who says that his prospects have been ruined & that the prospects of several of his friends have been ruined by the time and attention he has bestowed on the Society." "Very unfortunate - but it is impossible this can be common." "Sir it is against the statutes - you must disperse." But we may retain our reading room - and continue our present debate - granted. - Long debate - all manner of motions - Remonstrances proposed. - Committee - Whewell - Thirlwall - Sheridan - Lawson - Lodge - My Lord Chief Justice a fool as usual and apparently somewhat frightened. - Committee met today. Now what think you of this? - It is not yet decided what is to be done but of course there must somehow or other, a great noise be made. Do you not think it would do good to write to Clarke & inflame him about it. - And to write to some of the newspapers - it has been proposed to petition the chancellor - write immediately and tell me what you think. - I have done nothing for Lacroix [Silvestre F. Lacroix] yet but we will talk of that another time'.

Letter from William Knight to James Martineau

Explains his delay in replying to Martineau's letter, giving his reasons as his having to move around Scotland much in the past while, and also his concern for his daughter's health. Also apologises for not having enclosed in his first note the annual subscription, which he should have sent 'before offering to join the brotherhood of the Free Christian Union', the establishment he welcomes warmly 'as a rallying centre for all catholic hearts in the divided church.' Believes that the spirit of the movement 'is in deepest accord with the aims of the Blessed Founder of the Christian commonwealth.' Refers to the report of the movement's committee.

Suggests that it would be advantageous for the Union to 'secure the adhesion of several very pronounced Trinitarians....' Asks whether Dr Temple has joined, and suggests that possibly the latter's connection with Rugby 'hindered him from expressing public sympathy.' Presumes that, 'amongst the Bishops, he will surely not be behind Thirlwall and the late Bishop Hinds.' Refers to the fact that 'that remarkable Indian [ ]' is coming to England to study Western civilisation, and laments 'that he will see such a divided and dismembered church....' Assumes that he will have heard of the Union, "and it will command his earnest sympathy.'

Stresses that the function of the Free Christian Union is ' "responsible not for the final attainment of truth, but only for the serious search [of] it" '. Refers also to the nature and origin of Error, which, according to the maxim of B[ ] was 'a truth abused'. Undertakes to put down on a separate page some thoughts on 'the two great theories as to the person of Christ', and to send to Martineau 'an account of any paper that may be read which possesses general philosophical interest.' Acknowledges that this is 'far beneath [Martineau's] London Metaphysical Club', but that the aims are the same.

As to Martineau's request for suggestions in relation to 'a Scotchman able to contribute a paper to [his] projected volume of essays', Knight puts forward some names. Fears that Principal Tulloch is too ill to attempt such a project. Believes that Dr [John?] Muir would be able 'to give a valuable paper on such a subject as, the parallel and divergent lines of thought in Eastern and Western civilization'. Mentions also Professor Campbell, who holds the Greek chair at St Andrew's University, and who read a paper on 'the footprints of the doctrine of Immortality amongst the Greeks...to [Knight's] Speculative club', and Edward Caird of Glasgow, who, 'although inclined towards a modified Hegelianism would be very well fitted to contribute an essay, were he to join the Christian Union'.

Refers also to Dr Robert Wallace, 'Professor Lee's [successor] in Greyfriars church Edin[burgh]', as 'a remarkably able man, with an intellect at once clear, incisive and robust', but who 'lacks delicacy of perception'. Fears that, although he is 'the most thoroughly pronounced broad churchman in the Established church of Scotland...perhaps he would shrink from openly identifying himself with the Union.' Adds that he is a member of the 'New Speculative'.

Lastly mentions Dr Donaldson, Rector of the High School in Edinburgh, and author of a critical history of 'the Ante Nicene Christian Literature.' Adds that there are 'some remarks on B[ ], and the School of Tübingen in that work' which might indicate that he was unsympathetic 'towards the great movements of modern philosophic thought', but claims that he is 'really one of the most catholic and liberal of men'. States that he was one of the few men in Edinburgh who understood 'to the last' Knight's late friend Mr Cranbrook. Claims that Martineau's ' "Endeavours" and his ' "Essays" ' have already taught him much, and that 'hours spent with them are amongst [his] most prized recollections of the past....' Sends him a copy of 'Mr Lake's memorial sermons in reference to Mr Cranbrook...with a brief note appended' [not included].

Knight, William Angus (1836-1916) philosopher, author and clergyman

William Whewell to Richard Jones

Trinity College - Thirlwall [Connop Thirlwall] considers 'himself to be a very ill used and unlucky man in being inveighed into the chair after he had left the room for a couple of hours, and is penitent for his outbreak; so I hope you at least continue stout of heart, and strong of stomach'. WW is writing his report on mineralogy 'which is full of induction as anything in the world is if people will only look' ['Report on the Recent Progress and Present State of Mineralogy', Report of the First and Second Meetings of the BAAS, 1832].

Letter from Hugh James Rose

St. Thomas's - HJR has enjoyed reading WW's pamphlet 'as it is it contains wisdom most rare and instruction most precious for us at all times' ['Remarks on Some Parts of Mr Thirlwall's two Letters on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834]. 'The more I think of Thirlwall's pamphlet [Connop Thirlwall, 'A Letter to the Rev. Thomas Turton, on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834] the more mischievous in every way do I think it. The theory is bad as you have shown - the feeling is bad, the tone is bad and the arguments resorted to (as in the Master's Sermon) unfair and not worthy of a gentleman'.

Letter from Charles Townsend

He would have answered WW's letter earlier but has been waiting for Stewart Rose's promised notice of Italian etymologies. SR has been ill and therefore he has not written much 'but if it will help Mr. Thirlwall [Connop Thirlwall] or yourself in any paper you may be drawing up on the subject it is entirely at your service'. He longs to see Richard Jones lecturing at Somerset House. He gives a list of words of Italian derivation in the English language.

William Whewell to Richard Jones

Trinity College - WW will come to visit RJ on the same day as Connop Thirlwall. After London, WW will return back to Lord Braybrook's and to Cambridge again. WW hopes RJ will begin work on his book now that the fiasco over the King's College Professorship is over: 'If you are resolved to maintain your first whim to be a failure I will not fight against you now: but at the same time...it is no bad success for a book not deductive like Ricardo's, but inductive, and in its induction, as you must allow, far from complete, to obtain so much notice as yours has done: and I dare say that half the impression is a great deal more than the Wealth of Nations or Malthus's Population or any book of similar novelty and importance sold in the same time'. McCulloch's review of RJ's book 'gave you or your friends an opportunity of urging your opinions in a polemical form: - that opportunity was lost by your procrastination: - I think the loss was an advantage; and shall think so the more if it urges you on to publish what remains'. RJ once spoke of writing an article for the Philological Museum. He should think of doing it now as Connop Thirlwall 'is rather in want of grist for his mill'.

Letter from Julius Charles Hare

Unfortunately the holidays are nearing their end. No doubt WW is already back at College - 'If so, will you ascend my staircase and see whether the painters have finished my room, and if not, urge them on'. JCH stayed at Hyde Hall when he left Cambridge: 'Being thrown more together with Sir John alone, I found more and more to admire in him'. Connop Thirlwall has resolved to come to Trinity College: 'I hope now a little more confidently, that we shall be able to do something in Cambridge for classical literature'.

Letter from Julius Charles Hare

Herstmonceux, Hailsham - JCH has received a parcel from WW and Connop Thirlwall [WW, 'Additional Remarks on some parts of Mr Thirlwall's Two Letters on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834. CT had produced a pamphlet entitled 'A Letter to the Rev. Thomas Turton on the Admission of Dissenters to the University of Cambridge', 1834, as a response to the House of Lords rejecting a Bill to abolish tests and to Thomas Turton's, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, defence of religious disqualification's in his 'Thoughts on the Admission of Persons, without regard to their Religious Opinions, to Certain Degrees in the Universities of England', 1834 ]: 'It used to be a source of great satisfaction to me to think that I had left you Thirlwall as a colleague. My grief however was overpowered by indignation on learning yesterday that the master had not only required him to give up his place in the tuition, but had also recommended his resigning his fellowship. Surely this is a most outrageous step. The high church party seem all gone stark-mad, and to have been all seized with a fanatical desire of martyrdom at all costs and risks. Else I should be utterly unable to comprehend how the master could be guilty of such a piece of insolence and folly. I conceive that, in making this recommendation, he was urging what he has no authority to enforce: and assuredly the pamphlet contains nothing to warrant such a proceeding. I long to hear what the fellows will do in consequence. It seems to me that, in addition to your private answers to Thirlwall's circular, there ought at least to be a general protest, if not a general address to him. Is it true that what the master has done has been prompted by Rose [Hugh James Rose]? I cannot believe it. If it had, he ought never to be admitted into any room in the college again'. However where CT attacked compulsory chapel service it was right that he should be made to resign: 'For it seems to me that the officers in any executive body are bound not to proclaim the defects of the system they are appointed to execute, unless in concert with their brother officers, and with a reasonable hope of correcting the defects they complain of'. JCH regrets as much as WW what CT says about chapel attendance: Still is not the fact of his speaking in such a way about the practice a strong argument against it? I think you strain the argument from antiquity, though of course I concur heartily with what you say about such an argument. In ancient times the practice of the colleges was in unison with that of all the rest of the country. Daily religious worship was then general'. Students on the whole see chapel going not as a religious duty but more as a muster-roll which is injurious. JCH gives his opinion on Christian Dissenters: 'I was very glad to see what you said in defence of 'prescribed exercises', and against the 'full consciousness of freedom'. It is so strange that a person who weighs his words, and knows their meaning, like Thirlwall, (unlike C. Wordsworth) and have been led by his abhorrence of 'compulsory religion', into arrant quakerism: that is to say, quakerism in the idea; for of course the quakers, out of their hatred of all forms, become the greatest formalists among mankind. It is strange that he should have overlooked the difference between 'compulsory religion', and religion into which one is led, and in which one is strengthened, by moral influences. Though force is destructive of religion, these influences, being cognate to it, are not. Alas one cannot have a fortnight in the care of a parish without finding that to talk about 'the full consciousness of freedom 'as necessary to religion is totally inapplicable to the present condition of mankind'. Theology may be installed into a man but not religion. 'It is [awful?] to think of the breaking up of that singularly happy delightful society which we enjoyed for so many years at Trinity. But how could one expect that it would be privileged to last for ever?' Who did not foresee that the Reform Bill 'was to shake every institution and to loosen every tie throughout the country!' How can WW say he stands completely outside the conflict? and should he?: 'You who have so much influence with both parties, who see through their delusions, who have so many qualifications for mediating between them?' In fact WW's pamphlet shows that he cannot abstain. Hopefully the forthcoming vacation will cool men's minds and induce the master to apologise to CT. 'Have you heard anything lately of William Wordsworth? He will be grieved to hear of these college quarrels'. John Sterling has been lately with JCH - 'whom I know not whether more to admire for his genius, or to love for his simplicity, his gentleness, his frankness, and his noble mind'. Sterling tells JCH of the 'very good effects produced by the abridgement of the service at Corpus. If something of the kind were done, it might give the service more the character of family prayer and I think a great deal of good might be done by having a sermon more short, and bore upon the condition of the congregation, somewhat of the manner of Arnold's [Matthew Arnold] admirable Rugby sermons. This would be much in associating religious feelings with the place'.

Letter from Julius Charles Hare

Herstmonceux, Hailsham - JCH spent a delightful evening at Warfield with Lady Campbell, Miss Malcolm and Miss Kate - 'an evening that brought back Hyde Hall and all its happiness'. The next day he went to London and saw Lady Malcolm in the evening: 'It was the first time of seeing her since our loss [the death of Sir John Malcolm?]...Her face was a good deal changed, a good deal oldened. Sorrow and pain had brushed its lustre away'. WW's fears of falling out with Connop Thirlwall will hopefully not be fulfilled [see JCH to WW, 1 June 1834]. JCH liked WW's second pamphlet ['Additional Remarks on Mr Thirlwall', 1834]: 'the main part of your arguments occur to me quite convincing and unanswerable'.

Letter from I. Todhunter to Henry Sidgwick

Writes on philosophy in Cambridge. States that the correspondence of Hare and Whewell gives him the impression 'that there was very little mental philosophy read at Cambridge in their younger days'. Whewell's lectures were very well attended in the early years after he was appointed professor, but the numbers attending declined after he began to develop his new system. Refers to the paper set on philosophy for the Trinity Fellowships, and to Trinity lecturers Thompson and Cope. Refers to his own undergraduate days from 1844 to 1848, and mentions the works on philosophy which were influential at that time: an article of ancient philosophy by [Maurice], and Lewes' Biographical History of Philosophy. Believes that Lewes led him and many of his contemporaries to read J.S. Mill.

States that in St. John's College in his time 'a meagre abridgement of Locke used to be read in the first year, which 'finally disappeared under Roby's zealous efforts to reform [the students].' In relation to mental philosophy in those days, remarks that there 'must have been persons who were fond of [it]', and reports that he say a copy of the French translation of some of Sir W. Hamilton's essays in the private room of the mathematical tutor Mr Hopkins. Relates that Herschel's [Preliminary Discourse on [the Study of] Natural Philosophy 'was a book much read at Cambridge'. Mentions the absence of any account of the Greek Philosophy in Thirlwall's History [of Greece], and the political activity in England consequent on the Reform Bill and its results, as possible causes of the lack of interest in [mental philosophy].

Refers to a perceived 'taste for philosophy' arising in the previous thirty years at Cambridge, and cites theological influences as the possible cause, e.g., Butler's Analogy [of Religion], the sermons of Harvey Goodwin, and Dr Mill's contact with Hare and his Christian Advocate publications. Relates having, with others, admired the Sermons of Archer Butler, and having encouraged Macmillan to buy Butler's manuscripts, and publish the Lectures on Ancient Philosophy. Thinks that they appeared in 1856. Refers to Sir W. Hamilton, who 'became first known to most Cambridge men for his attacks on mathematics and on the Universities', and to W. Walton 'of Trinity Hall formerly of Trin. Coll.'. Adds that in 1834 'Sterling and J.C. Hare and others wanted to found a prize for Essays on the Philosophy of Christianity in honour of Coleridge', but the H[eads] would not allow it. Announces that he shall publish two letters from Whewell to Hare on the subject.

Todhunter, Isaac (1820-1884) mathematician and historian of mathematics

Letter from Julius Charles Hare

Herstmonceux, Hailsham - JCH hopes to come to Cambridge in mid-November for a couple of days: 'There is so much I want to hear from you both about persons and things. Where is Thirlwall [Connop Thirlwall]? I have heard nothing of him since he went abroad in June. I hope you do not find that your controversy has produced any coolness between you. It certainly ought not: for he felt the friendliness of your first pamphlet, and this feeling must assuredly have been strengthened by the second. Still it will be long before he can feel at home among you again' [see JCH to WW, 1 June 1834]. Has WW seen William Wordsworth - 'I rejoice to see from the British Magazine that we are to have a new volume of poems from him soon. Alas, he is now the only object of veneration left in England'. Since JCH saw WW Samuel Coleridge has died. John Sterling thinks a monument for Coleridge should be established at Cambridge on the philosophy of Christianity: 'The plan delighted me the moment I heard of it; and I hope in a few days to send you a sketch of some proposals to be circulated with a view to raising subscriptions for the purpose' [see JCH to WW, 25 Oct. 1834]. JCH is working on an edition of his his brother's, Augustus Hare, parish sermons. Meanwhile the third volume of Niebuhr's History of Rome has yet to be done.

William Whewell to Richard Jones

Trinity College - Things 'are all going wrong here and I dare say shall soon be in a condition quite insolvable. Thirlwall [Connop Thirlwall] has published a pamphlet on the Dissenters question' ['A Letter to the Rev. Thomas Turton, on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834]. Subsequently, the Master [Christopher Wordsworth] has asked him to resign which he duly did: 'The Whigs are a bitter set, and not very scrupulous, and I dare say will do something to shew their wrath'.

William Whewell to Richard Jones

Trinity College - WW never actually got to London: 'I set off for the coast on Friday intending to see how the coast guard took up the orders of the Admiralty which were issued at my suggestion and finding that everything furnished well along the shore of Suffolk I thought I could not do better than come back and write philosophy'. WW expects he will 'have a postscript to my pamphlet ['Remarks on some parts of Mr. Thirlwall's letter on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834. See WW to RJ, 28 May 1834] to write for I find that Thirlwall is charging another pistol which he will let off in a day or two ['A Letter to the Rev. Thomas Turton, on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 2nd edn., to which is added a 2nd letter containing a vindication of some passages in the first letter', 1834]. I expect that I shall find it necessary to let off something in return. I was very glad that you liked the tone of my last and I shall probably keep the same ground in my reply' ['Additional Remarks on Mr Thirlwall's Letter...of Academical Degrees', 1834].

William Whewell to Richard Jones

Norwich - Perhaps WW should have suppressed his pamphlet altogether, 'but there was something which looked like a challenge in a part of Thirlwall's [Connop Thirlwall] which drew me on' [see WW to RJ, 12 June 1834]. WW thinks RJ's suggestion that WW's pamphlet could be seen as a defense of the Master's dismissal of Thirlwall as absurd. On the contrary, WW thought Thirlwall's opinions on chapel going could have been overcome: 'This I told his friends (Sedgwick, Musgrave, Romilly etc) from the first'. WW is clear about his own view: 'The case is the same as that of an officer in any other body publishing an attack upon the system which he has to carry into affect: or a cabinet minister declaring himself against a cabinet measure: the tutors and assistant tutors were understood by most of us to be engaged to further the observance of all college rules by the undergraduates'. This does not mean a tutor cannot hold Thirlwall's opinions about dissenters, as is clear from the case of George Peacock. RJ will find that Julius Hare 'considers that the Master could not do otherwise than he did, and Sedgwick [Adam Sedgwick] acknowledged that Thirlwall's declarations were inconsistent with his position'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Thanks WW for his Additional Remarks ['Additional Remarks on some parts of Mr Thirlwall's Two Letters on the Admission of Dissenters to Academical Degrees', 1834]: 'I am sorry to say that I do not think the pamphlet in general likely to promote the cause of truth, and that there are passages in it which have very disagreeably perplexed and surprised me'. Beneath the rhetoric of the Master's letter CT interpreted to be this: 'I would deprive you of your Fellowship, if I could: I can deprive you of your Lectureship, and I do'. CT accordingly treated it as a command. However, he has subsequently learnt from the best authority 'that what I took for a command, was indeed meant to produce upon me the effect which actually resulted from it, but to other persons it was designed to present a different aspect, and to be regarded, not as an act of authority, but as an extra-official declaration, coming indeed from a person whose judgement might be supposed to have great weight, but still leaving me to my own free choice, so that I might not be said to have been turned out of my office, but to have resigned it, and the necessity of the change was not imposed upon me, but resulted from my own reflections and consciousness. Though I am aware how often a large share of petty cunning is to be found in very narrow and muddy intellects'. CT does suppose that WW knew 'of this piece of duplicity' but he finds WW's 'language so ambiguous as equally to suit either supposition'. WW never made it clear what exactly their differences of opinion were to which he attached so much weight. Hence CT neither knows whether they are closer in opinion than before or not: 'I am not conscious of having taken a single step from my original ground, nor do I see that you have abandoned any of your positions'. Besides which the reader will not be any the wiser with regard to understanding the real state of the question: 'The real difference of opinion between us turned simply on the value of our Chapel service, in a religious point of view: you rated it very high, I very low'. However, instead of confining the discussion at this level as CT intended, WW 'treated my remarks on the chapel service as if they had been deduced from a general observation, if employed to decide the question about the College chapel, might be applied to the destruction of all religious institutions'. Religion cannot be instilled into men against their will - 'voluntary exercises of religion tend to promote it: If then I condemn prescribed exercises, it must be because they are not voluntary; but I cannot be supposed to disapprove of those which are prescribed in accordance with the will, or to contend that an exercise must needs be contrary to the will, if it is prescribed, which would imply the absurdity, that a religious person can never be inclined to pay deference to the judgement of others, in any matters connected with religion'. An exercise of religion prescribed against or without the will is not an act of religion, but rather 'it kills religion or religious feeling, which may not exist in this case, as that its natural tendency is to produce a state of mind very adverse to religious feeling - a fact which seems sufficiently proved by the history of all attempts made to effect conversion by violence'. Giving rewards for religion is absurd - 'when the desire of these advantages is the sole motive of action, there can only be an outward shew of religion without any of the substance, and that such an outward shew is most detrimental to real religion'. The principle - no religious observances can be useful to the person engaged in it, if his will has no part in it - 'does not even exclude the exertion of authority to enforce religious observances in a society of men where the observances themselves are in harmony with the general will of the society, and where the exertion of the authority is acknowledged to be necessary in order to convey that will into effect'. This depends on the condition of society and the nature of the ordinances themselves. CT is upset at the way WW has twisted his meaning. The case is as follows: there has always been a class at Trinity 'who have distinguished themselves from the mass of the young men by their religious fervour. Till lately this class has met with a great many discouragement's, not only from their fellow students of a different character, but also from their elders'. However their numbers have increased and this is reflected in the chapel service: 'these persons are serious and earnest everywhere, they are so in chapel, and consequently there is an increase of seriousness and earnestness in the congregation...The main point is that there is not the shadow of reason for ascribing it to our chapel system, though it has taken place under, or notwithstanding, the system'. WW sets out in his 'Additional Remarks' by repeating an erroneous statement of CT's opinion: 'treating my impression as to the pernicious nature of all restraint with regard to religious observances. You then proceed to draw a picture of the consequences which would endue, if all such restraint was abolished among us; consequences, as you apprehend, full of dishonour to the governing part of the society, and of detriment to the governed. With regard to the former you seem to me to have committed a most glaring fallacy in supposing it would follow that we must be utterly inactive and silent if no such restraint was employed. Surely if the matter was left open to our choice, and we did not choose to enforce our observances, we should not thereby preclude ourselves from inviting to them; and even those who might think us mistaken in our judgement could not reasonably charge us with insincerity because we preferred the one method to the other; more especially as the great object of the invitation, the religious practice of the observances, is one which is wholly out of our power to enforce'. The precise area in which they differ is 'whether the observances are indispensable to religion , or whether they are clearly the most efficacious means of promoting it'. WW thinks 'that a young man's religious feelings, acquired by education in a well-ordered family, must suffer a severe shock, if when he comes to college he finds himself left to his own discretion as to religious observances. I can see no reason for imagining that such an effect would ever be produced'. CT thinks the opposite is the case. He gives a history of public worship from one day a week to everyday from the third century. CT's opinion was founded 'on the actual operation of the system , so far as I could judge of it. And if the question is made to rest on these grounds, then with regard to the tendency of the system it may be of great importance to consider what aspect the ordinance presents to those who are enjoined to attend it: whether it is one for which they may be supposed to come so far prepared that it finds a hold on their feelings and judgement, or whether it is likely to appear to them strange and startling at first, and afterwards as a practice, which, if it had any merit, would be a work of supererogation'. CT thinks the latter is the case with the great majority. It is difficult to conceive it as a family service when one considers the form of prayer. Even more removed from the family service is evening service: 'I cannot help thinking therefore that a comparison between our service and family worship must fail for all practical purposes'. Further, 'notwithstanding the excellence of our liturgy, I believe it is a notorious fact, that, by itself, particularly when divested of the charm of music, it is everywhere found to exert a very feeble attraction, which cannot be supposed to be stronger here than elsewhere'. For instance although the chapel is open to the public the only day in which they come is Sunday and that is due to an 'obvious motive'. These are some of the reason CT does not rate their daily service as an instrument of promoting religion. Neither does he think the difference is that great between their views: ''for at p.7 you admit that it is true to a considerable extend that our institutions do not operate as we wish in fostering devotional feelings'. What has grieved CT the most in WW's 'Additional Remarks' is the way WW has magnified their differences. WW lays 'great stress on the evil and the scandal that would ensue to us, if any of our pupils should be permitted to live here without joining in any service'. But it is precisely this class which get nothing out of the service and therefore it simply begs the question. 'The chapel service has been represented as an institution of great importance, and it was conceived that there would be a difficulty in reconciling its advantages with the admission of Dissenters'. CT sees no such problem. He also claims that the 'if the naked Liturgy is not found to exert a stronger attraction elsewhere, there seems a very faint prospect of its exciting increased interest here. And indeed, as long as we merely adhere to our present system, it is difficult to conceive from what quarter such a change is to arise'. CT and WW differ on this point since the latter sees a prospect of continual improvement which CT is unable to discover. CT thinks one weekly service and sermon should substitute the daily services. WW likes the idea of a weekly service but not the abolition of the daily service. WW's pamphlet, 'so conveyed, imports a stigma , which I can scarcely hope ever to efface. You have indeed rendered an immense service to my adversaries: one which they could have received from no other person. For it required, not only your great abilities, and eminent reputation, but also the neutral ground on which you professed to stand, and the friendship which you avowed for me'. WW's assertions concerning CT's view of Dissenters are 'utterly groundless, and directly contrary to a fact which appears on the face of my first pamphlet. The abolition of the daily worship was proposed by me long before the question about the admission of Dissenters had been raised, and before it either did or could occur to my mind. And as to the endowments of the University, the very point of your complaint, as far as I understand it, is that I have made no proposal at all. I am quite at a loss to conceive what can have led you to make such a charge against me, which is calculated to produce the impression that I am a covert enemy to the Church, who is willing to sacrifice its independence and its highest interests to those of the Dissenters'. Although WW's 'last pamphlet goes to do me deep and almost irreparable injury, it has not raised in my mind the slightest suspicion of your truth and honour, and of the sincerity of your goodwill toward me'.

Letter from Julius Charles Hare

Thanks WW for his two letters and two lectures ['Two Introductory Lectures on Moral Philosophy', 1841]: 'The dedication of the latter to Worsley [Thomas Worsley] I was right glad to see'. WW's 'first lecture on casuistry is interesting but is scarcely complete enough to be substantive, and would have come much better, I think, as an introduction to the course on the history of moral philosophy in England, of such I heard several lectures last year. By the by, there were some good remarks on casuistry, if I remember right by De Quincey in an article on Duelling in the February number of Tait'. CJH does not go along with several things WW claims in his second lecture: 'However they both hold out a promise that much will be done for Moral Philosophy in Cambridge'. JCH saw Connop Thirlwall in London - 'who is quite fat upon the cares of his bishopric, though he seems most deeply to grieve over the necessity of abandoning all his former studies all I have seen and heard strengthens my persuasion that his appointment was anything but a happy event for him; and I am afraid he will hardly render so much service to mankind in his new post, as he would have done if he had been allowed to devote his life to philology and philosophy'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

CT's opinion regarding WW's inquiry is 'that in my judgement the proposed union of the two North-Wales Bishoprics is a measure utterly unnecessary, impolitic, unjust, and pernicious'. No 'Diocese in the kingdom can so ill afford to lose any part of their ecclesiastical revenues' as the church in Wales. It seems to CT 'equivalent to a declaration, that in the opinion of those who alleged it the interests of the church, and the feelings of the people in North Wales, are of so little importance that they may properly be sacrificed - not to the welfare of an English Diocese, not to any object of politico-ecclesiastical etiquette, or to a notion of symmetry, or to some Episcopal aversion of danger to be apprehended from the example of an English Bishop who should not be a Lord of Parliament. Even with regard to this point I think the plea, miserable as it is, raises an argument of at least equal weight on the other side. For I think the Welsh might contend with quite as much reason that, if there is any advantage to be derived from the representation of the church in Parliament, they have not now more than their fair share of Episcopal representatives'. CT's Welsh printer is very slow printing his Charge. They are converting the South Transept of the Cathedral into a parish church.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

CT did not get WW's letter till much later since he is in Abergwili and not St. David's: 'There remains therefore no practical purpose to be answered by any observations I can make on the subject of your inquiry' concerning the election of the Divinity Professor. Nonetheless he gives his view: 'All that I have seen and heard of Ollivant [Alfred Ollivant] has led me to think very favourably of his character. Steadiness, firmness and discreetness appear to be among its most prominent qualities. To them perhaps, rather than to a deficiency of feeling, is to be ascribed a certain dryness and coldness of manners which renders it easier to esteem than to like him'. With regard to his qualifications for the professorship CT 'can only speak negatively. I have never seen any production of his which indicated more than very ordinary powers of mind'. Above all CT would object to him as a candidate because it is not for his learning or intellect, but 'because he represents the opinions of a party among its members. Nevertheless, I entertain so high an opinion of his integrity, moderation and candour, that I have no doubt, if he has been appointed, he will fill the office creditably and usefully'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Thanks WW for his Memoir on Hegel's Criticism of Newton's Principia: 'he is, to say the least, one of the most impudent of all literary quacks and I feel sure that there is no part of his so-called philosophy which, if carefully examined by a competent and impartial judge, would not lead him to a like conclusion'. CT 'has so much faith in the force of truth, as to believe that sooner or later Hegel's name will only be redeemed from universal contempt by the recollection of the immense mischief he has done. It is certainly a very remarkable phenomenon, and one which will deserve to occupy a large place in a future history of European philosophy and literature in the 19th century, that such a man should have exercised so great an influence over the mind of Germany'. CT would be surprised if this high opinion of Hegel is shared by a German whom WW would recognize as a competent judge of a scientific question.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Thanks WW for his work on Induction and the second Memoir: 'The former brought back to my mind several passages by which I had been much perplexed and dissatisfied in the midst of the pleasure and admiration with which I had gone through Mill's [John S. Mill] book some three years ago ['A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation', 1843, second edition (1846)]. It is not for me to pronounce between two such thinkers, at least until I have seen a rejoinder to the reply: but I certainly have a very strong impression that your main position cannot be shaken'. As to WW's'Additional Note to the two Memoirs' CT thinks it certainly puts Hegel's place in the history of German philosophy: 'The master thought of his philosophy is Schelling, all that is his own is the rashness and violence with which he has carried it out into detail, by a perpetual perversion of facts and juggle of words'. CT finds it 'an inestimable blessing to live in an an intellectual atmosphere in which such monstrosities either could never come to light or most instantly die, even though it may not be quite so genial as that in which they flourish'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Does WW know of anyone at Cambridge whom he could recommend for the office of Vice-Principal of St. David's College Lampeter?: 'I need hardly observe that moderation and freedom from party spirit are qualifications peculiarly desirable for the office'. Subject to the number of students the income is around £700 per annum.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Thanks WW for his German story [Berthold Auerbach, 'The Professor's Wife' translated by WW, 1851]: 'I do not know whether more to admire or envy you for being able to find time to do such things, while I can hardly contrive to read them'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

Thanks WW for his letter: 'No approbation could have been so valuable to me as yours, with respect to that part of my Charge in which I was particularly anxious not to say either more or less than the occasion required'.

Letter from Connop Thirlwall

In theory it is the case that CT has such a large share in the appointment of the Vice Principal of Lampeter College, 'that it may be said to be absolutely at my disposal: but practically, in the ordinary course of things, I am merely passive with regard to it'. CT would not like to exert his prerogative without some special occasion.

Results 1 to 30 of 61