distinct heads, was published by him in a letter to the Rev. Joseph Berington, respecting the continuation of Dodd's Church History of England, Lichfield, September 1826. But the pressure of years, and many prudent misgivings, deterred him from attempting actual publication; so that, after restoring to the bishops, colleges, and to other private owners, their respective portions, Dr. Kirk assigned what was properly his own to the Rev. M. A. Tierney. Whilst detailing Dr. Kirk's herculean labours of transcription, &c. for Dodd's Church History, we must not omit a very tedious task which, with no small trial both of patience and of eyesight, he undertook about the year 1794 and the following years, at the request of his friend the late Sir Thomas Constable, in deciphering and copying, and preparing for publication, the curious and interesting state papers and letters of Sir Ralph Sadler, the "right trusty and well-beloved counsellor" of Queen Elizabeth, and one of the royal gaolers of the unfortunate Mary Queen of Scots during her confinement in Tutbury Castle. The original papers were in the possession of the Cliffords of Tixall, who inherited, through the Astons, from Sir Ralph Sadler, and were published by Arthur Clifford, Esq., in 1809, in three large quarto volumes, with a biographical sketch by Sir Walter Scott. Amongst the persons to whom, in his advertisement, Mr. Clifford makes acknowledgment for papers and information contributed, he thus writes of the subject of our memoir: "In particular, I have to acknowledge the infinite obligation which I owe to my very learned and amiable friend the Rev. John Kirk, of Lichfield, without whose kindness, zeal, and ability in copying the original papers, this work would, most probably, have never seen the light." But that which stamps his character, and will commend his memory to the gratitude of Catholic posterity, is the work which he undertook, in conjunction with the Rev. Joseph Berington, to supply a recognised deficiency in our popular controversy, entitled The Faith of Catholics confirmed by Scripture, and attested by the Fathers of the Five First Centuries. The work is now familiar to every Catholic, and has been freely referred to, and specially made use of, by almost every controversial writer and preacher since its publication, and is deservedly considered one of the most useful and learned works of modern times. It does good service by the side of Milner's immortal work The End of Religious Controversy, and acts a subsidiary part in the battle of argument, with a crushing weight of authority. As a library book, it has been greatly augmented and improved by the Rev. Dr. Waterworth, of Newark, who has revised the whole, and has added two volumes of well-sifted material to the original matter. As some exceptions had been taken against the accuracy of the "Propositions" which form the heading of the work, Mr. Kirk published in 1815 a very interesting pamphlet, of nearly a hundred pages, entitled Roman Catholic Principles in reference to God and the King; first published in the year 1680: to which is prefixed an Inquiry respecting the Editions and the Author of that valuable Tract. It evinces great industry of research, and felicitously proves, from circumstantial evidence, that the "Principles" were drawn up by the Rev. James Corker, a Benedictine monk, and Abbot of Lambspring, a fellow-prisoner with Archbishop Plunkett and Lord Stafford, the innocent victims to the frightful perjuries of that fanatical time. The "Principles" had been published in a variety of shapes, and had gone through numerous editions, but profound theologians questioned their entire accuracy; and, with all his great respect for Dr. Kirk, the late Bishop Milner would have preferred the adoption of a more authoritative formula, such as the Creed of Pope Pius IV. In addition to the above literary labours, Dr. Kirk's active pen and well-stored mind furnished many useful contributions to the periodicals of the day, and were always ready at the service of any of his brethren who were engaged in subjects of English ecclesiastical history, and who wanted dates and facts and verification. He enjoyed the friendship and intimacy of all the great lights of our English Church, and never made a valuable acquaintance which he had not the rare fortune to preserve. As a well-merited compliment for his many useful labours, the Rev. John Kirk received, by diploma from his late Holiness Pope Gregory XVI., the degree of Doctor of Divinity. The diploma was dated Nov. 9, 1841. To complete his character, we may add that Dr. Kirk was a correct accountant and an able financier. The clergy highly appreciated his merits in this department, and were immensely indebted to him for the care with which he nursed their funds, and for the improvement of those funds under his judicious administration. In person Dr. Kirk was the model of a fine man. His physical frame and mental faculties were freely and favourably developed, and he possessed the sound mind in the sound body. To the very last his faculties were clear, and his memory distinctly retentive; and though his frame was impaired by infirmity, it was not shattered. Neither had he suffered, otherwise than in a mitigated form, the labour and dolour pronounced by the Psalmist to be the ordinary lot of those who linger beyond the term of eighty years. His was rather the old age described by King Solomon, "a crown of dignity, when it is found in the ways of justice. Corona dignitatis senectus, quæ in viis justitiæ reperietur (Prov. xvi. 31). "I suppose," writes a distinguished ecclesiastic, "that with our poor friend we have lost the father of the secular clergy. At all events, we have lost one whose place, in many respects, it will not be easy to supply." And a still more eminent personage condescendingly writes, "I have to-day offered up the adorable Sacrifice for the truly venerable and estimable Dr. Kirk. I had a letter from him a few weeks ago, which shewed no decay; but he was indeed a ripe fruit, and is gone to enjoy his Christmas in a better place." It had been the wish of the Bishop and of the clergy to have brought his remains to the cathedral church of Birmingham, that he might have honourably reposed under the sanctuary of St. Chad's; but his relatives strongly pleaded for St. Cross, Lichfield, where he himself had prepared a vault, and where he had expressed a strong desire to be buried. Accordingly it was thought right to yield to this desire, though at the sacrifice of a certain solemnity which would have accompanied his funeral at St. Chad's. All, however, was done that under circumstances could be done. The clergy of the neighbourhood assembled, and a solemn Mass of Requiem was sung in the little church of St. Cross, Lichfield, by his friend the Rev. Dr. Weedall, assisted by the Rev. Dr. Moore, and the clergy and choir of St. Mary's College, Oscott. Peace be to his soul! May his lengthened life have been, from God, a pledge of his bright destiny, and have proved a title to an immortal crown. Longitudine dierum replebo eum, et ostendam illi salutare meum (Ps. xc. 16). THE ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL AND THE CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. Brook-Green House, Hammersmith, MY DEAR SIR,-I readily comply with your desire to be furnished with information regarding the present relations of her Majesty's Catholic subjects towards the Committee of Privy Council on Education. You are aware that, from the institution of that Committee in 1839 down to 1847, the Parliamentary grant for education, amounting in the aggregate to £507,282 28., was employed in aiding the erection of schools. From the whole of the benefits arising from the distribution of this large amount of public money Catholics were entirely excluded, by a regulation imposing on all aided schools the use of the Protestant translation of the Bible. In 1847, the application of the Parliamentary grant was extended beyond the original building outlay, so as to comprise aid towards the annual expenses of schools. From this extended aid, Catholics, who had been led to expect fairer treatment, were shut out, by means which attracted so much notice at the time that little need be said now. You will remember that the course adopted_by_Government formed the subject of very strong observations in the House of Commons, and was reprobated by the leader of the Conservative party no less than by independent Liberal members. A change of policy was thus effected, but not perhaps carried out with any remarkable show of alacrity. However, a minute of Council, admitting Catholic schools to share in the aid administered by their lordships, and recognising the Catholic Poor-School Committee, was passed in December 1847, and confirmed by Parliament in the session of 1848 by the adoption of the education vote. The minute so confirmed is of the most simple and unobjectionable character, and contains no allusion to conditions, the subsequent imposition of which has proved so detrimental. As soon as the vote of 1848 was taken, the Secretary to the Committee of Council desired to confer with the Chairman of the Poor-School Committee, the Hon. C. Langdale, whose name, you will give me leave to say, can never be mentioned without feelings of the highest respect and gratitude by those who, like myself, are acquainted with the disinterested and religious devotion which, from day to day, he gives to the cause of Catholic education. The chairman was then informed for the first time of a principle declared to be universal and indispensable in cases of building-grants, viz. that aided schools should not only be conveyed in legal form to safe trustees-a provision in itself most desirable-but that the deed constituting the trust shall provide for the management of the school by a mixed and complicated machinery. I beg your particular attention to the words in which the requirement was communicated to Mr. Langdale, and accepted by the Poor-School Committee. They are these: "Local management of the school to be partly clerical and partly lay. Management and instruction, where directly or indirectly connected with religion or morality, to be solely under the authority of clerical members; and in case of any question arising thereon, an appeal to the ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF THE DISTRICT. The years 1849 and 1850 were spent in arranging questions of detail, and at length, in December of the latter year, a managementclause was proposed by the Privy Council, and accepted by the PoorSchool Committee, which, like all the previous documents, contained reference to the name and authority of the "Roman Catholic Bishop of the District." A school deed comprehending the settled clause was submitted in May 1851. I need not remind you how Parliament was employed in that year. You, at least, are not answerable for the act against our Bishops and its disastrous consequences. The mischief, however, was done, spite of the noble resistance made by the friends of justice and religious freedom; and in the end of last November the Privy Council announced that the law-officers of the Crown had been consulted upon our school deed, and had advised their lordships that the words "Roman Catholic Bishop of the District" are contrary to the Titles Act, suggesting in their room the use of the words "officiating as a Bishop of the Church of Rome, and as Ecclesiastical Superior of the persons in communion with that Church residing within the district." The chairman has at once rejected this suggestion as derogatory; and we have been likewise informed by our legal advisers, that in their opinion, the phrase recommended, though it be by such eminent authority, is as contrary to the statute as the words sought to be superseded. Such is our position at present. Words imposed in 1849 as part of an essential requirement of the Privy Council, and adopted without remark in December 1850, together with all similar words referring to the Roman Catholic Bishop, have been made of doubtful legality by the Titles Act, which is thus operating to deprive our poor children of the educational benefits extended to them by Parliament. The Lords of the Privy Council-in other words, her Majesty's Ministers -comprehend in their school machinery, as a matter of obligation, the authority of the Catholic Bishop, and the same ministers make that authority void by their Titles Act. And thus, out of £475,000 voted since 1847, in addition to the £507,282 before mentioned, Catholics have received nothing to help them in providing schools. Nevertheless, the hope of obtaining such aid, which our schools were quite justified in entertaining, has led to many claims; and a Parliamentary paper of 1851 names the following Roman Catholic schools as having applied in this way between September 1848 and August 1850. (See page 181 of enclosed Catholic School.) These schools, which when built will provide education for about 8000 children, are all returned as "awaiting the settlement of a model trust-deed." In some cases conditional grants have been announced, as I am informed; e. g. :— To Kemerton, £52 10s.; Liverpool, St. Ann, £700; Manchester, St. Chad, £600; and in the last case the greatest inconvenience is felt. Such is the barren result of the main division of Government aid to schools. In grants towards the annual expenses of schools we have a brighter tale to tell. In December 1848, Mr. T. W. Marshall received the appointment of her Majesty's Inspector of Roman Catholic Schools, and for the last three years has laboured most beneficially amongst our schools. Sixty of our teachers have honourably obtained the Certificate of Merit in Mr. Marshall's examinations, and are entitled to receive in annual augmentation of their salaries upwards of £1000. As assistant-teachers, we have more than 200 young men and women apprenticed to capable school-masters and mistresses, and earning amongst them £3000 a year, while they are being trained under the eye of the clergy in the acquisition of sound knowledge and proficiency in the art of teaching. Towards the purchase of books and maps, so far as my information extends, our schools have claimed about £300, in addition to a free gift of books to the Poor-School Committee. You are well aware that these annual grants are open to every Ca tholic school, and you know the high value they possess in raising and extending the course of education. It would give me great satisfaction to know that Carlisle had distinguished itself in this way by the success of its schools. I must not conclude without mentioning that towards the Training School now happily established by the Poor-School Committee, to provide Catholic England with competent skilled masters, the Privy Council have promised a grant of £1676; and that our students, if as successful in the examination as we hope, will hereafter draw from the same source a good round sum towards the heavy annual expenditure of the establishment.-Believe me, &c. P. H. Howard, Esq., M.P. SCOTT NASMYTH STOKES. In connexion with the above, the following should be well noted: ROMAN CATHOLIC SCHOOLS.-MANAGEMENT CLAUSES. (No. 20.) Committee of Council on Education, Dec. 17, 1850. SIR,-In reply to your letter of the 29th ult., which I have had the honour of submitting to the Lord President on his return to London, I am directed by his lordship to express the satisfaction of the Committee of Council on Education at the settlement of the questions which have been so long under discussion between the Roman Catholic Poor-School Committee and their lordships.—I have, &c. The Hon. Charles Langdale. R. R. W. LINGEN. THE FRENCH CARDINALS SENATORS. CARDINAL GOUSSET. Thomas Gousset was born on the 1st of May, 1792, at Montigny-lesCherlieu, a humble village of the department of the Upper Saone. His father, now dead, was a farmer. His mother, who is still living, brought up with the greatest care the numerous family with which the Almighty had blessed her. Thomas Gousset worked in the fields until 1809, when he commenced his Latin studies in a private school at Amance, a village situated six leagues north-east of Vesoul. In the course of three years he presented himself before the Academy of Besançon, and received the diploma of Bachelor of Letters. He next entered the Grand Seminary, and soon became the first scholar in an establishment remarkable for the many distinguished theologians it produced. He had scarcely finished his studies, when the directors charged him with the conferences intended to teach the youngest pupils the mode of learning. On the 22d of July, 1817, he was ordained Priest by M. de Latil, then Bishop of Amyclea in partibus, whom he was afterwards to succeed as Archbishop of Rheims. He was named Vicar at Lure, a difficult post in many respects, which he filled with much success, when the diocesan authority recalled him nine months afterwards to Besançon to profess moral theology. He occupied that chair during fourteen years. In 1830, Cardinal de Rohan, who appreciated his merit, conferred on him the title of Grand Vicar, which he preserved under the administration of Messrs. Dubourg and Mathieu, that is, until the period of his elevation to the episcopacy. A royal ordinance of the 6th of October, 1835, appointed him to the see of Perigueux. On the 1st of February following he was confirmed by the |