The Merthyr Express

CORRESPONDENCE. i ) The Editor wishes it to bo distinctly understood that he will not hold himself responsible for the I opinions or statements of correspondents, nor under- take to return rejected manuscript. Correspondents MUST write on one side of the paper only. Correspondents are requested to condense their re- marks as much as possible as. owing to the very great demands upon our space, we cannot undertake to publish letters of great length. Letters of a personal character will not be inserted.

THE MERTHYR "GROUP" AND COUN. GRIFFITHS. Sir,—I am not surprised at the letter of Mr. Evans. He, like Coligula of old, wishes to place all under one head, no that he may strike it off with a blow. He points to his friend, Coun. Griffiths, as the man "Who dares to be a Daniel." Surely, Mr. Evans is not ignorant of the compromise with the Catholics to support their schools in their entirety, which not only means rate-aid for Sectarianism, but also re- ligious tests for teachers. Are these the prin- ciples of Socialism? The Catholic split rote sent Mr. Griffiths to the Council, where he signed the constitution of the Labour Group. When the interests of the Catholics were at stake he &at neutral. The Romanists at once J convened a meeting to bring the so-called "Daniel" to judgment. At the meeting he gave a second promise. Mr. Evans will, I am sure, admit that in the face of this no pledge- bound party could with consistency tolerate him within their ranks. It shows a weak case when Mr. Evans trios to justify the action off, his friend by simply attacking Nonconformity. "The evils of private ownership," I think, is a pet subject with Mr. Evans. Still, he shuts his eyes to the fact that the doors of clerical schools are closed not alone to the Socialist, but also to the Nonconformist teacher. Does Mr. Evans advocate the sacrifice of principles for the sake of votes? If so, he has evidently lost his So- cialism. If the Catholics are really anxious I about their children's education, why don't they transfer the schools to the public authority? Then the Church could devote all its attention to the cultivation of. this wonderful "Catholic atmosphere. -y ours, etc., A SOCIALIST..

THE I.L P. ACTION APPROVED. Sir,—It is rather afrnusipg to read the dog- matic utterances of Mr. J, Evans in your la.->t issue. It would have been more to the point had he been able to deny that Coun. Griffiths had put his principles into the Catholic melt- ing-pot. Is Mr. J. Evans aware, that the Mer- thyr I-L-P., before discussing Mr. Griffiths's case, invited him to be present at the meeting? Although he ignored their Jetter and did not attend, they postponed voting on the resolu- tion, and wrote him again. He again treated the branch with contempt by not turning up or sending a note of explanation. The resolu, tion was to the effect that they dissociated themselves from the action of Councillor Grif- fiths in making secret compacts, and would not acknowledge any candidate who did not run on the straight Socialist ticket. I understand the Labour "Group" also failed to get him to at- tend when they discussed his case. If Coun- cillor Griffiths has any justification for his action, why did he not appear at the=e meet- ings and defend himself? His champion can- not shield him by pointing to others. Only a short time ago the Free Church Council dealt severely with one of their members for the same sin. I should like to ask the Irishmen of Dowlais, what would they do to a pledge- breaker in their own ranks?—Yours truly, J. H.

THE ALLOTMENT GARDENS AT CYFARTHFA. S,ir,-In the "Express" of the 24th April. Coun. Dan Thomas expressed surprise that only four tenders were received for the Cyfarthfa garden allotments. I believe the tenders were for one or two vears only. Were the Council ready to grant the use of sheds for storage pur- poses, or would every successful applicant have to build his own? I have had some experience of doing up gardens for other people's bene- fit. Anyone before tendering would want to be satisfied that he would not be turned out after raising one crop. I think if the Council had fixed a rent for the allotments and there had been proper shed accommodation at hand, there would have been a number of applicants. Surely, the matter of fixing a fair rent would be an easy thing for the Council with the es- tate agents and valuers who are on it. Whilst speaking about Cyfarthfa. I may add that I am sorry that the Council did not appear to appre- ciate the past services of the park-keeper at Thomas Town Recreation Ground in the ap- pointment they have just made for Cyfarthfa. I have always found him at his post and very polite whenever I have visited the Recreation Ground. Why do not the Labour members get the park keeper an eight hours' day, and relief on Sundays? Could not the gardeners take turns with him? I mention the latter part be- cause I always like to see f F AIRPLAY,

MINERS OUT OF WORK FUND. Sir,—I should like very much to give an an- swer to Mr. Griffiths on the out of work fund. T thought I made it clear enough that our ex- penses would be 1e«. There is onf thing we should have to send our money to the central. and then back to different districts to pay our ouf of work men. A few years ago it was tried f by ballot and losr by a big majority, and it will fce this time if they go on that line. As for the nineteen districts we should have to contend with, it would not matter if there were 119 districts. We could pay our money to our own district, and, as I said before, if there were a district that needed help then it could apply to the other districts for it, and I think all the committees would arrange that without calling the body of men together to decide whether to send help or not. If a man was idle a week we should have the money in our funds at home, and could pay him when it was funds at home, and could pay him when it was I needed instead of keeping him waiting till hun- ger stares him in the face. If we fog^d it would not work then we could form a central fund, and each district could pay its own members ail the same* FEDEBATIONIST.

REV. MORGAN JENKINS, ABERCYNON, AND THE "ALIEN CHURCH." Sil' Will you kindly allow me, through the medium of the "Merthyr Express," to respect- fully ask the Rev. M. Jenkins, English Congre- gational minister, Abercynon, if he will be good enough to supply the readers of your valuable paper with historical proof derived from indis- putable authority of the assertion which he made at the annual meeting of the Abercynon Free Church Council, held at Bethania Chapel, Abercynon, on Monday evening, April 26th, 1909, when seconding the resolution in favour of the Government "Spoliation Bill" relating to the rights and property of the ancient British Church of the land, to the effect that the Church in Wales is an alien church? And, further, will the rev, gentleman inform the community as to who were the real founders of the Presbyte- rians, Independents, or Congregation ulists, Baptists, Wesleyans, Quakers, and tbo Salva- tion Army, and will he furnish the public at large with the exact names of those countries where these religious bodies had their origin, prior to their advent to the Principality of Wales, and whether they are in his estimation, native of the soil of Cambria, or otherwise aliens? I ask these questions not in the spirit of defiance or in any way to cause offence to those concerned, among whom I have a host of staunch friends, but in defence of the truth, historical accuracy, and justice, which is justly due 1;0 the question at issue.—I am, etc., D. ELLIS JONES, Vicar of Abercynon.

SOCIALISM AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Sir,—It is very kind of "Merthyr Vale Demo- crat" to treat my opinions anent Socialism and the Catholic Church "with toleration and re- spect," especially when it is put in the form of an innuendo implying that there are some opinions which he cannot treat in a similar spirit. Social Democrats should treat every- body's opinion "with toleration and respect," and not only those of a brother Socialist. In this connection your correspondent has appar- ently fallen from grace. In your issue of the 10th ult., "Merthyr Vale Social Democrat" quoted me as saying that religion must go be- fore Socialism can be realised when I had only said that the church must go before Socialism can be attained. In your last issue he is still more reckless in his misrepiossntations. My statement that I "was not speaking for the S.D.F. or any other organisation" is hopelessly juggled. I am made to admit that I "do not speak for Socialism or the S.D.F."—an ad- mission which I never made, and which if made would be absurd, and a flagrant self-contra- diction. To say that the church must go before Socialism can be realised and the same moment admit that I am not speaking for Socialism, is so glaringly ridiculous, that one would have expected even a Roman Catholic to see it. Of course, I am speaking for Socialism when I say that the church must go. etc., and I may hero claim that the great majority of international Socialists are of the same opinion. I merely stated that I was not speaking for any organisa- tion simply to safeguard myself. When one remembers that there are many Christian Soci- alist bodies in our land fervently believing that Socialism is the best conceivable social and economic expression of Christ's teachings, it would but compromise the S.D.F. if I were to speak in the name of that organisation when contending that the church must go before So- cialism can be realised. Your correspondent is a Roman Catholic first and foremost, whilst Socialism is the fag-end of his philosophy. So- cialism, to your correspondent, is merely a question of bread and butter. To the philoso- pher the movement is capable of a wider appli- cation. It is all very well for your correspond- ent to glibly re-iterate the formulae socialization of the means of production, etc., when he has never reflected upon the great change in our religious systems the realisation of such a for- mula would involve- I maintain once more that the church, as an or- ganised institution, must go in virtue of the logio of events that make for the Socialist re- public. The church is a hindrance to the evolu- tion of the Socialist Commonwealth, and when a Social Democrat contends that the Catholic Church can co-exist with a Socialist Society-in fact, and in part, the religious expression of that Society—one can but say, to indulge in a paradox, that it would not be a Socialist so- ciety at all. The Catholic Church did not agree with the French Republic, and the church had to go over the borders. If a class republic has found this procedure necessary for her spiritual welfare, what price a Socialist republic? Be- ing that there is already a conflict of creeds, and which, to all appearance, will be accentu- ated in the future, can we ever hope for an agreement in religious matters? I think not. Consequently it is plain that r.o church will be maintained by the State. Religion is a private matter, and as such, will not tolerate State in- terference. The Catholic Church can never be internationalised in the Socialist sense; and her failure to adapt herself to this demand, will mean her natural death. The new religion will be founded on science, because science is the same here, there, and everywhere. Science can be applied internationally, so can Socialism. Socialism is essentially scientific. The Catholic Church is unscientific. Her cosmic theories are ba,d on Genesis 1, xi. If "Merthyr Vale Social Democrat" under- stood Socialism he would no longer remain a member of the S.D.F. That paradox is easily explained. If your correspondent understood Socialism he would find out that the movement is the church's greatest enemy, and instead of devoting time to Socialist propaganda, he should rather fight it in the interest of the church and his religion. Again, Marxian Socialists—and they are in a majority—subscribe to what is known as the materialist conception of history, which briefly means that the ideological activi- ties of any historical epoch are but the reflex of the economic conditions of that particular epoch. In instance of this the Catholic Church as existing to-day, is a reflex of capitalism. I That being so the stupendous revolution im- plied in Socialism will entail a collateral revo- iutigg in thft id^.logical projiace oi human ac- -r: tivities, It is true that the Catholic Church has always managed to adapt herself to every eco- nomic change known to history—for the simple purpose of self-preservation. But the coming social revolution will deprive the church of her economic nutritive, and she will accordingly die from financial hunger The Catholic Church —-I say once again—is a negative obstruction to the growth of the economic and political forces that make for Socialism. The church will, there- fore, have to go.—Yours sincerely, HUW MENAI.

.1 WELSH DISESTABLISHMEN I Sir,—I do not know that I should have taken any notice of the letter of "Anthropos," which appeared in your issue of April 24, had it not been for the unfair use which he makes of some words of the historian, Professor Free- man. If any of your readers will take the trou- ble to refer to his little book, "Disestablish- ment and Disendowment: What are they?" (a most useful little book which only costs six- pence) they will find the quotation on page 49. But, as they will see at once, the words do not give Freeman's own opinion, they are the sup- posed words of someone who is arguing in fav- our of disestablishment. The paragraph begins: "The argument in favour of such a course would seem to be this," and then later on come the words quoted by "Anthropos" "But now that the Church, etc." It is because I protest strongly against inaccurate and unfair quota- tions that I take notice of the letter. But as I am writing, it may be worth while to notice some other points. "Anthropos" does not seem to understand that whilst the King, through the Prime Min- ister, nominates a person to be Bishop or Arch- bishop, the King cannot make him a Bishop. He does not become a Bishop till he has been consecrated by other Bishops—the ap- pointed ministers of the Church. And just as the State cannot make a Bishop, so the State does not pay him. All Bishops, including the Welsh Bishops, an paid out of funds which are the property of the Church. This can be very easily proved, because if the State paid the Bishops there would have to be provision made in the annual Budget, and the sum of money necessary would have to be voted annu- ally by Parliament. If "Anthropos" doubts this, will he kindly give your readers the ac- counts in the Parliamentary votes which pay the stipends of the Bishops? It will take him his lifetime to find them. Again, he tries to draw a distinction between what he calls private endowments of the Church, and ancient endowments. There is no such distinction, a Let me refer him again to Freeman's book, page 55, "People sometimes forget that there are such things as dissenting endowments. But, though they are not of any very great amount, and though, of course, they cannot be of any very ancient date, there are such things, and, where they exist, the law pro- tects them. Now the difference between these endowments and the endowments of the Church is simply this, that the endowments of the Church are much greater in extent, and the mass of them are much older in date, than the endowments of dissenting bodies. All alike are gifts made by different persons at different times in ways which the law allowed at the time when they were given." Once again he says, "The unanimous voice of tho Welsh peo- ple is for the Disestablishment and Disendow- ment of the Church of England." At the last election over 50,000 voted for the Conservative candidates. Is this what "Anthropos" calls a unanimous vote? And, further, only 15 of the 34 Radical members mentioned the subject of Disestablishment in their election addresses. Personally, I believo that if this question could be put simply and solely to the electors of Wales the majority would be found to be in favour of the Church, and not against it.—Yours, etc., WM. GODFREY, Organising secretary for Church Defence in South Wales* Church Defence Offices, Cardiff. t

THE MEANING OF ESTABLISHMENT. Sir,—As the question of disestablishment and disendowment is so comprehensive and varied in its aspects, and as "Churchman" is so blow witted, that I expect to see the Bill in force be- fore he can gather his thoughts together, per- haps you will allow me to put this letter in be- tween, as it were, to lay down a few elemen- tary truths regarding the meaning of establish- ment in its bearing on the endowments of the Church of England, promising that in my next letter I shall deal with the origin and growth of tithes and endowments in the earlv times. Firstly, a few remarks on the origin and meaning of the Established Church of Eng- land, which has been overlooked in the excite- ment of controversy and the heat of debate. Strictly speaking, tho Church of England as distinct from the Church of Rome, can trace its pedigree no further back than the time or Henry VIII. It is generally acknowledged by the most eminent supporters of establishment, who cannot foresee the legitimate conclusions of their own admissions, that the establishment of the Church of England was brought about by Henry VIII. and the Reformers, and confirmed by the Act of Uniformity, after it was upset by the civil revolution, which establishment means that the King is the head of the Church of England in contradistinction to the Roman Catholic Church and the dissenting bodies. This is the meaning of establishment, and the pecu- liar characteristic of the Church of England. Establishment does not mean that it was at the time of Henry VIII. that the church first came under the control of the State. It was always under the control of the State. Establishment means that the King and not the Pope is the supreme head of the Church. Accord in"- to the British Constitution he is the nominal head of the Church to-day. He has the exclusive right to the appointment of bishops, to assemble and dissolve convocation, to limit its prerogatives, to refer all ecclesiastical causes to himself as the final and supreme authority. But the real head of the Church of England to-dav is Par- liament. The difference between the Church of England to-day and the Roman Catholic Church is the same as the difference between the Church of England from the time of Henry VIII. and the Church of England previous to that time. So that the Church of England in this sense be- gan with Henry VIIL It being clear then that the Church of Eng- land as an established church and as a church which was formed according to English ideas and customs cannot be traced further back than the Reformation, it follows that whatever pro- perty was given to the Church previous to that time was given to it as a branch of the Roman Church, governed by the representa- tive of the Pope, and according to Roman ideals and customs, so when Henry and the Reformers severed their connection with the Roman Pontiff and established the church on independent Eng- lish ideas, the church—to carry the argument of the supporters of private endowments to its logical conclusions—according to all canons of justice and equity, forfeited all right to en- dowments of tithes, first fruits, glebe lands, monasteries, given by patrons of the church, and enforced by Statute law, when it was a Roman institution. The High Court of the House of Lords not long ago decided that the majority of the old Free Church of Scotland in amalgamat- ing with another church and becoming incor- porated in what is now known as the United Free Church of Scotland, forfeited all right to property and endowments originally given to the Old Free Church, the which property and endowments were retained by the minority. Consistently the inference from the argument of private and voluntary endowments advanced by Earl Selborne and Brewer, is that the tithes and endowments given to the church previous to the Reformation and now possessed by the Church of England, legitimately belong to the Roman Catholic Church. This is the logical conclusion of the arguments of those who say that the endowments were Niven to the church independent of the State. But if these endow- ments were given by the State to the church, and given by individual patrons to the church as a part of the State, then Henry and tho Re- formers had a perfect right in retainin- them when the church severed its connection with Rome. This was the view taken by Henry and the Reformers. The great objection to disestablishment is that it lawfully brings with it disendowment as well. If the church could be disestablished without being disendowed, it would be all plain sailing. So that the real opposition to disestab- lishment is not made from a. religious stand- point, but from a property standpoint But, as the "Spectator" reluctantly admits, the only Christian standpoint is the spiritual one, the contention that the spiritual interests of the community would suffer if the church was dis- established. To say that the object of those who support disestablishment is to destroy the church is tacitly to admit that there is not sum- ciant religious vitality in the Church of Eng- land to keep it alive apart from the State. <:> ANTHROPOS.

THE CHURCH AND ITS ENDOWMENTS. Sir,—"Sufficient has been said to expose the crude and silly questions of 'Churchman. Such are the words of your correspondent "An- thropos'' when summing up his attempt to an- swer my simple query: "When, where, and to what extent did the State endow the Church?" I make him a present of the epithets "oructe" and "silly," and were it not for my regard for the truth, I should certainly respectfully decline to have anything further to say to such a. per- son as "Anthropos." By and bye, I shall ask the reader where the "crude" and the "silly" come in. In a perfectly arbitrary manner, your correspondent introduces the terms "State en- dowments" and "private benefactions." Un- der these two headings he includes the whole of the property belonging to the Church. He adds: "The question as to what legally belongs to the Church of England and what does not, is not for me to decide, and is irrelevant to the subject." Thi-a is an amazing statement. If her endowments do not in some sense—I use the expression advisedly-belong to the Church of England, why is there need of an Act of Parliament to dispossess the holders of The State would resume ownership by a simple exe- cutive act without legislative interference at alL It may be news to "Anthropos." but it is nevertheless true, that the Church of England as such does not own nor hold any property in any shape or form. What is loosely spoken of as Church property is really the property of corporations, each one independent of the otheir, and each one of which has acquired its endow- ment in different ways at different times. The process is going on apace at the present mo- ment. New corporations are formed and en. dowed aocording to the liberality of the volun- tary offerings of those who help to constitute new parijibe^ t neyer sjogle. instance .IJo-"<- _o. has, or does, the endowment come from the State. All the State does, and has ever done, is just what it does in the case of every pro- perty, namely, see that it is applied to the purposes of the trust and prevent dishonest dealings with respect to it, whether on the part of its owners or of those who would rob the individual corporation of its legal rights. This supervision by the State does not mean State ownership in the case of these corporations any more than its protection of Nonconformist pro- perty and endowments means State origin and ownership. Perhaps "Anthropos," if he will do so in the case of any authority. will bow to the opinion of Blackstone, a lawyer and jurit of the first order: "At the original endowment of parish churches, the freehold of the church, the churchyard, the parsonage, the glebe, and the tithes of the parish were vested in the parson by the bounty of the donor, as a temporal re- compense to him for his spiritual care of the inhabitants, and with intent that the same en- dowment should ever afterwards continue as a reCDmpense for the ame care." Then this learned man adds: "The law has therefore wise- ly ordained that the parson—'quateuus' parson —shall never die. any more than the Aing- by makin- him and his successors a corporation, by which mean* all the original rights of the parsonage are preserved entire to his succes- sor, for the present incumbent and his pre- decessor, who lived some centuries ago. are in law one and the same person, and what was given to the one was given to the other also" (Blackstone, Bk. I., chap. 18). There is not a breath or a syJlable here to hint that the State had anything to do with the endowment in the sense of giving anything to anyone of these ecclesiastical corporations. The quotation given from Makowsr in the loose language of a historian who was evident- ly not an expert, and the comment of your correspondent in which he jumbles up Ecclesi- astical and Crown revenues, is in direct conflict with the opinions of every writer of standing from the Reformation onwards. "Anthropos" confuses, for example, monastic property with Church endowments. A careful and unpreju- diced student of history would have discrimin- ated between them, and would have noted the fact that a great deal of the property of the monasteries had been absorbed from the ancient endowments of the Church Henry VIII. reo cognised this, and whilst laying violent hands on this property generally, he made a pretence of restoring to the Church the portion taken from her by founding schools and. endowing bishoprics with the money. This ancastor of Liberationism, however, carried out his promise dishonestly, and gave the bulk of the wealth to those who assisted h-im in the spoliation of these institutions. Referring to the policy of the Liberationists, the late Lord Selborne, one of the profoundest lawyers of the last century, spoke of it as "nothing less than immorality. nothing less than robbery, nothing less than persecution." I might quote other authorities. such as Sharon Turner, Selden, and Toulmin Smith, and. lastly, Dr Freeman, who emphatic- ally stated that Church property and Noncon- formist property "rest on exactly the same grounds. The State has the same right over both." The same authority has laid down tho dictum: "Church property is not national pro- perty except in the same sense in which all property is national property." Of all the random assertions contained in the letter of "Anthropos," the most extraordinary is the following: "J stated distinctly, in my last letter, that all Church property and en- dowments previous to 1703—the date of Queen Ann's Act, etc. —is the property of the State, as the Church was then co-extensive with the State, and was the State in its relig- ious aspect." How could the Act in question, paired for a specific and carefully defined pur- pose. bring about the vast change which your correspondent suggests? The Church was never co-extensive with the State excepting GO far— and this is true to-day—as its operations and objects went; i.e., the bringing of religious influences-, as far as its resources enabled her to do ro, within the reach of all the subjects of the State. The fallacious character of this as- tounding proposition is proved over and over again in the history of every century, and the frequent conflicts between Church and State, and the numerous statutes passed from time to time by hostjle legislator; show clearly that the Church and State were not one and the same body Let "Anthropos" study the legis- lative ordinances of the country, and he will discover that for once he has sadly misread the story of the Church's life. It is deplorable that at such a late hour of our national life such a statement should be made. In the next place, he trots out the old argu- ment, if it can be called an argument, about grants made to the Church by George III. and George IV. He deliberately ignores the col- lateral fact that similar grants—only the figure is greater—were made to Nonconformists. The taunt comes with bad grace from the writer of the letter under review. From 1722 to 1851, the Dissenting communities in the kingdom re- ceived both Crown and Parliamentary sub idies. If your correspondent or any reader cares to study the question and read the tale, let the Parliamentary paper known as 127 be perused. Here the transactions are recorded in the words of the Board of Trustees —a body appointed by Parliament and required to report to the same authority how these grants were distributed. The leading Dissent- ing bodies participated in these benefits. Up to 1840, no les3 a sum than £1,369.003 12s. 6d. was voted to the Nonconformists of the country by the State. Th's does not exhaust the finan- cial aid conferred upon Dissenters by Parlia- ment, and "Anthropos" is welcome to all that my answer to his taunt conveys Dissent. When it suits it—and that is pretty often—has evinced a decided penchant for money from the taxes or the rates of the country! Of .course, I fully anticipated the accusation so often used against the right of the Church to her endowments. "They belonged to the Church of Rome; Henry VIII. took them from the Church of Rome, and gave them to the new Church formed by him." That is the sum and substance of the position taken up by "An thropos." The deduction, of course, is this: Because Henry VIII. robbed the Church of Rome, we. the Liberationists, are doing the right thing in robbing the Anglican Church. The ethics of this argument are more than con- temptible—they are despicable and worthy of the very lowest and most depraved type of pil- lage and plunder. But did these endowments belong to the Church of Rome, or to the great Eeclesia Anglicana-the English Church? Was there at the Reformation an atrocious act of plunder committed, and property ruthlessly stolen from one body and given to another? Maybe "Anthropos" will give heed to Mr. quith's views oh this point. In the House of Commons on March 21st, 1895, Mr. Asquith said: "I am not one of those who think, as used to be currently assumed, that the legisla*- tion of Henry VIII. transferred the privileges and endowmentv of a National Establishment from the Church of Rome to the Church of England. I believe that view rests upon imper- fect historical information. I am quite prepar- ed to admit, what I believe authorities of his- tory now assert, that there has been, amidst all these changes and developments, a substantial identity and continuity of existence in our National Church from earliset history down to the present time." No wonder that "Anthro- allegation has been characterized by a leading 19th century politician as a "flagitious calumny almost if not actually criminal." The astounding inconsistency of "Anthro- pos" is revealed in all its nakedness in his unctu- ous condemnation of State-made religion, as he is pleased to describe the Church, and his de. fence of the scheme now before Parliament for destroying absolutely the character of the Church in Wales, and setting up in its place a "Church" made according to the notions of a House of Commons, and all in direct opposi- tion to the wishes of its members and without even asking them whether they will accept the constitution offered to them or not. It is time to have done with this fooling, as Sir H. Camp- bell-Bannerman once said. There is no excuse for such ignorance as your correspondent shows; and if he dreams, as one gathers from one of his queries, that an Asquith, or a Lloyd George, or a Keir Hardie can divorce the Government of our nation from religion, we shall live to repent it. I deny emphatically that the Church has received its endowments from the State, and I have given the evidence of first-class authorities in support of my oontention. I hold that the Church to-day, as she has been throughout the ages, is the noblest example of voluntaryism that the world has over seen. If "Anthropos" doubts this, let him buy a copy of the "Year Book" of the Church for 1908— Dissent, with its vaunted voluntary sysstem, pales into insignificance by the side of the effort of the Church. I have trespassed too much upon your hospitality to enter upon my reply to the query about our Blessed Lord's teaching and the profession of national religion. Suffice at to say here, that it is passing strange that all Christendom, for 1,800 years, should have gone astray in this matter, and that a few insignificant Celtic sects should have made the discovery late in the 19th century that a nation- al recognition of God was contrary to the doc- trine of Christ. In Scotland, Dissent is "estab- lished by law" in the literal sense of the term, and abroad in the mission field, wherever Dis- sent can do so, it takes care to get itself estab- lished as far as the constitution of pagan states will permit. Tho whole argument of our op- ponents rounds back to this point: We hate the Church, although we profess to pray for it; we yearn for its destruction, and we want to do all we can to cripple and to destroy it. In doing this we need not, and we do not, intend to be particular about the weapons we use. If it were a question of right and wrong and of truth and falsehood; it would be settled in one day. The Dissenting communities of our land, if they have enjoyed their possessions for 25 years, havo an indefeasible right to them, but the Church, with an unbroken and undisturbed possesion of hundreds of .years, is to be do- spoiled, plundered, and left a lacerated and bleeding mass to please the political Dissenter and bis Socialist and Atheist allies.—Yours, CHURCHMAN.

MARRIED LADIES. My recent offer of a free sample of Nurse Powell's Popular Pellets met with such striking success, and enabled so many ladies to prove that they do actually cure all irregularities, that I have decided to repeat tbe offer. Ladies should write for Free Box, enclos- ing penny stamp for postage. Belay is often dan- gerous, so write nOIV.-llrso T. M. Powell, Rep. lingUara Roa(Jt .Wandsworth,, Loudont 8.W, j

-r" .# I 1 SOAp: ] {:- =:p 't'ji\:4!- \.C i "í J TflQ C flP t. i Or | GOOD ttCflLTtt ¡I Good Lifebuoy Soap cleans and disin- fects at the same time, thus saving trouble I and expense For the users of I r Lifebuoy Soap. Keeps home and body free from disease. AM Good -an @I m Health LEVER BROTHERS, LIMITED, PORT SUNLIGHT. I THE IABE LEVER 01 SOAP IS A SUARAITEE OF PURITY A19 EXCELLENCE. J i. tt J —

Physical Culture in Quakers' Yard] Truant School. > The following account of a visit to the Truant School at Quakers' Yard is taken from "Health and Strength" :— When I was a small boy, I played truant sometimes, for school was not so interesting then as it is now. Therefore, it is not surpris- ing that, during a visit to Merthyr Tydfil, in South Wales, I should go out of my way to visit the South Wales and Monmouthshire Tru- ant School at Quakers' Yard, eight miles away, for, as you know, "A fellow-feeling makes us wondrous kind." You see, I sympathised with those young truants, and as I was conducted over the schools and grounds, I felt, somehow that after all it was not altogether a bad plan to be a truant; and one thing is pretty certain I should imagine. Those boys do not run away from this school, anyway-they do not want to. It is an exemplary institution in more ways than one, and eminently calculated to make Britishers of the right sort out of what is often very very raw material. To make men and women is the end and aim of ideal education; it is followed to the letter here. There are no cast-iron systems, no rigid rules; the boys are led, rather than driven, into the right path, and I am not surprised to know that so many of them have done well. But what struck me more forcibly than anything else was the variety and flexibility of the physical exercises here in vogue. They are based on Swedish models and Army physical training, and are carried out un- der the personaj supervision of the Governor, Capt. W. James Broome, A.S.C.T.F. Physical development is regarded as a most important feature of the school curriculum. Every day the boys turn out for drill, and I had the good fortune to see them at it. To judge from their appearanoo, they were practically all ardent Physical Caltunste. Fine, strapping, healthy, bright-eyed lads they were, and no mistake—a real credit to Gallant Little Wales. And what delight they took in their exercises! How their checks glowed and their eyes sparkled with that sheer joy of youth that only health can im- part! Capt. Broome is proud of the physique of his lads, but not more so than they are of their own. "What would you like to be when you're grown up?" I asked a smart youngster of eleven. "A champion, sir, like Hacken- schmidt and Peter Wright," he said. "Look at that, sir," and he showed me an arm whose development was such that his ambition is not at all unlikely to be realised. A fine figure of a ]ad he was, who stripped beautifully; and there were many others like him. Not the least sign of over-development did I detect; no sacrifice of one part of the body to another. I think if any of those boys enter a "Health and Strength" competition for all-round develop- ment, they will stand a very good chance in- deed. These boys are intelligent with it all, or, rather, because of it all. Their school record is a good one. "No boy can perform his school duties properly who is not physically fit," con- tends Captain Broome. "Give them health and strength first, and then, if they have it in them, cleverness will follow in the natural course of events." And he is right. S. E. S. Are you looking for anything? If A. a Want Ad. in our columns will yet it for youl J

Whitsuntide at Pontypool." /1 GREATEST PROGRAMME IN THE BRITISH ISLES. The two-days' fete,, held annually at the New Park, Pontypool, by the Pontypool Chamber of Trade, is again announced for the forthcom- ing holiday season, and the programme is well diversified, deserving greater crowds than ever. The most astonishing ai^l daring feat will be that of Edward J. Reddish, the great Contin- ental aerial cyclist and high diver, considered to be the premier sensational act of its kind in the world. The stage show has never been EO attractive, and entails double as much expense as any previous engagement of stage artistes at this fete. The Kauffman troupe of six lady cyclists are coming expressly to Pontypool from Germany. They are charmingly clever in their entire perfromance. It is sufficient to say that Brinn, whose sensational performance is called "Pastimes on a Battleship," was engaged at the last Shrewsbury fete, where the secretary (Mr. S. J. Wilaon) and his colleague were fully satis- fied with this artiste's great feat of strength, bearing on his head a Gatiing gun which was actually used in the Boer War, and being the only Gatiing gun in the possession of any pri- vate individual in this or any other country. The balloon ascent and parachute descent is an assured success, having regard to the person who has charge of this part of the programme, namely, the world-famed aeronaut, Capt. Spen- cer, who gave such entire satisfaction last year, although having to battle the terrible wind that prevailed on the first day. Herr Ponchery and La Belle Rosa. will give some of their most funny and interesting feats on the high wire. Woolford's Circus, with its wonderful perform- ing ponies, dogs, and donkeys, has also been engaged. The Bob Hanlon Troupe will give their graceful performance on the aerial bars. The Chandon Trio are quite new to this coun- try, and have only just arrived in England. Capaldi Brothers will undoubtedly interest all the younger patrons of the fete, and at the same time will give equal pleasure to the grown-ups. being such laughable, comical, and musical clowns. As eccentric comedy knock- about^ the Lea "Valdos are reputed to do very clever work. The Brothers Marland will be present, with their world-renowned Punch and Judy and Dog Toby Show. As regards "Ye Olde English Fair," Mr. Marshall Hill, .of Bris- tol, has written to the Secretary stating that he is going to bring some of. the best and most up-to-date roundabouts, eto., that are now tra- velling and working among the fairs of Eng- land. Included in the athletic sports on Whit- Monday will be the popular sack race, which is now confined to boya under 14. The Commit- tee have inserted an extra jump in their pro- now confined to boya under 14. The Commit- tee have inserted an extra jump in their pro- gramme of horse competitions, and this will be for horses under 15 hands. This will give a chance to the small horses to win a trophy. A class for ladies has a.lso been included, a very good prize of six Guineas being offered, with second and third prizes of two guineas and one guinea. The fireworks ought to be much ap- predated, seeing that a very large sum in excess of what has been spent on thi- part of th<>ir programme is being expended this year. The Chamber of Trade have secured a, refresh- ment caterers the well-known firm of Messrs. Butler and Co., Ltd., Wolverhampton.

FOUR MONTHS ON HIS BACK, Mr. A. Newton, of Felthara, writes "Yonr pills have completely cured me, after four months on my back." Sufferers can have their money returned if not satisfied with HOLDROYD'S PILLS. Guaranteed a positive cure for Gravel, Pains in the Back, Dropsy, Bright's, Wind Water Complaints, Dis- eases of the Kidneys, Stone, Gout, Sciatica, Rheu- matism. All Chemists, or post free, 12 stamps. iiObfcfcOX'trS MBUIQAL HALL, 1IWn, SHOPPING BY POST. 1i tt,^ Xi" T A7" will secure one of onf rn w JBJB IVIj JL Special 10s. 6d. or 21^ BALES containing Blankets. Sheets, Quilts, Flannel, Flannelettes, Towels. Curtains. Jackets- Skirt" Furs.Boots, Clothing. &c. \\rite_tor Bar^ ^in List"-WHOLESALE & EXPORT SUPPLY Co., 79, Knightrider-street, London, J1..C. I ¡ I Monday's joint, sliced and warmed S ¡' in a Me gravy made with B a Gravosal 9 M is more nourishing and appe- 9 I tising th&n if eaten cold. | Sold ul. Pts and 4&L Glass Jars. ■ ? SatHfh/raw H&nt&ni"? -"unt mfdtUidPus of Onctr to ■ | KINQOV TSADiNQ CO., Cardiff; | "1.. TINS- 3d. 6d. Is. ew Size ld. FLFAS BUGS BEETLES. MOTH On Blankets, Fars, etc.) WE do not claim to be able to perform miracles, as the days for these are past, but we certainly can lay claim to a great number of marvellous cure6, a* testified to by a multitude of people who have used our Remedy, viz- The MANNINA" HERBAL OINTMENT The coxes range over a field of many and varied diseases, as instance, Cancer of the breast, lip, etc.. Tumours, Lupus, Erysipelas, Carbuncles, Abscesses, Ulcerated and poisoned wounds, Sarcoma, Piles, Psoriasis, Scalds. Burns, Eczema, Ringworm, ROo dent Ulcers of the hands, Chapped ditto, Chilblains, Scurvy, Sprains, Swollen Feet, Rheumatism, etc. And we confidently invite the most thorough inves- tigation of these our various statements with rfv gard to the merits of our Remedy. Presuming that you are ready to take us at our word, and wish 14 test "MANNINA" for yourselves, see that you ob- tain the right thing. "MANNINA" (Trade Mark) is made np in three different strengths, as No. 1, Full, Cancer, etc-, cure, at 2s. 9d., 4s. 6d., and 8s. 6d. per pot. Aa No. II., Medium, for all poisoned wounds, at Is. lid., 2s. 9d., and 4s. 6d. per pot. As No. III.. Mild, for all skin diseases, at Is. lid., 2s. 9<1.. and 4s. 6d. per pot. The Mannina" Ointment is sold by the follow* ing Dispensing Chemists, viz. :-Meesrs. V. At Wills, 3a, Victoria-street, Merthyr; T. Davies. Porth D. E. Davies, Treorchy Emrys Evans. Aberdare; Oliver Davies. Mill-street, Ponty. pridd; Mr. D. George, Dispensing Chemist, 153, Bute-street, Treherbert; Mr. T.Thomas,M.R.P.S^ Consulting Chemist. Cash Drug Stores Co., f Treharris; Mr. D. Williams, M.P.S., Dispensing Chsmist, Commercial-street, Mountain Ash, &e. or can be obtained direct from the Sole Proprietor: The Mannina" Herbal Ointment: Co., Main Street, FISHGUARD. PLEASE WRITE FOR FBEE BOOKLET; To Restore the Sight. I ¡ The greatest discovery of the Age for-the Cnre of Eye Affection of every kind and at all stages. Short sight, Cataract, Fatigued Eyes, Weak Eyelids, Cross Eyes, Cloudy Vision, Inflamed Watery Eyes made clear and strong. EYE-EXERCISER (Patented in Great Britain and on the Continent), INVENTED BY- JAS. 61, The Woodlands, Birkenhead. Treatment absolutely safe and painless. In case of correspondence enclose stamped addressed envelope. 56, Arnold-street. Mountain Ash. Dec. 4th, 1908. To Mr. James Williams, 61, The Woodlands, Birkenhead. Dear Sir,-Having suffered for three years with very bad Eyes (Cataract and Watery Eyes and Defective Sight), I have derived very* great benefit from the "Eye Exerciser," and have got more benefit than I ever had from all the "Eye Specialists" con- f suited, including London Specialist, and I desire to thank you for it.—Yours truly, (Signed) Mrs. S. EDWARDS. » Hiss S. J. Edwards, daughter* | PART OF A TOUR. May 12th.-JEREMY'S HOTEL, St. Peters-street, Carmarthen. May 13th (morning).-IMPERIAL URN HOTEL, Llandilo. May 13 (afternoon).-40, IIIGH-STREET, Llanelly. ) May 14th.—MACKWOETII HOTEL, Swansea May 15th.-COUNTY HOTEL, Pontypridd. May 17th.—THE POPULAR RESTAURANT. Ystrad., Road, Ton PClltre i May 18th.-CESTRAL HOTEL. Cardiff. May 19th.-SHAFTESBURY HOTEL, Newport. Printed and published by the Proprietor, HARRY WOOD SOUTHEY, at Glebeland-street, Merthyr I Tydfil, May 8th, 1909. I