We will now copy another advertisement from the Record:

WANTED, in a small but well-established school, a LADY, to take the higher branches of English, to understand well the theory of music, and able to speak French grammatically. The principal is not young; and, having no relatives with her, a lady of most decided Christian principles and energy, who desires to live and devote her time and talents by training children to the glory of God, might rely on an affectionate home. Only a small salary would be given for the first three months; but many blessed privileges are enjoyed here by attending the ministry of the Rev. W. Pennefather; and a Christian lady, it is hoped, would not feel it a loss of time. There is a vacancy for two pupils this quarter. Terms moderate. Address, &c.,

That the principal of a school where the higher branches of English are taught should write bad English, allow that she is not young, and wish to turn a penny by the blessed privileges of the Rev. W. Pennefather, is not to be credited. Surely here is sufficient internal evidence of a most impudent hoax ; and the Record ought to have perceived the latant sarcasm of the mild rebuke applied to any who may feel that the attending the blessed privileges &c., is somewhat of a waste of time; making as it does, the compliment paid to the Rev. W. P. very equivocal.

As a set-off against the Record's critiques on its advertisements, we have its denial of a report which appeared in the Guardian, to the effect that the Bishop of Durham is trying to obtain practically the appointment of all the curates in his diocese. The Record says:-"We are surprised that any respectable jour

nal should repeat a malicious bit of country gossip so obviously false. The statement repeated by the Guardian has no foundation in fact." This denial may

satisfy the readers of the Record, who exercise their right of private judgment in discussing the Bible but dare not question the veracity of the paper they swear by. To all others, the statement is not "so obviously false" that it can be dismissed by simply saying that it has no foundation in fact." Unfortunately, too, for the Record, an "Old Curate" has written a letter on the subject to the English Churchman, in which he says:

When in the diocese of Carlisle, the Bishop, aided by the funds entrusted to the "Diocesan Clergy Aid Society," succeeded in forcing his nominee as curate upon several feeble and poor incumbents. Well may the Record defend its patron! I have known the Bishop reject curates nominated by the incumbents, and suggest an advertisement in the Record! I knew an earnest self-denying Churchman, who was nominated on a stipend of 40%. a year, to be refused, and thus lost to the ministry; the Bishop saying he would ordain none but graduates in arts. His lordship was immediately reminded that his practice was apparently the very opposite; but still the aggression succeeded. In more than one case was the sole charge of a parish given at once to an ex-dissenting teacher.

What will the Record say to this? Is this "obviously false" and without foundation? Knowing what we do of the Bishop of Durham, we should rather say it is obviously true. We therefore leave the Record to get out of the scrape as well as it can : it knows how to blow hot and cold-at one time regretting the appointment of Mr. Cheese and then defending

it. It has acknowledged that, in the matter of advertisements, it is sometimes hoaxed: it may also find it expedient to acknowledge that in its denial of the Guardian's statement it has been but the victim of another hoax.

THE POOR LAW.

['Union,' May 3, 1861.]

HE Metropolitan Society for the Relief of Distress, not content with pursuing unquestioned the even tenor of its way, has by its Secretary, Mr. W. Gilbert, thought proper to assert that the provisions now existing for the reception of the houseless poor are disgracfully insufficient. When called upon lately by the Parliamentary Committee to substantiate this statement, Mr. Gilbert's reply was :-"I think that the fact of 150,000 persons being thrown on private charity for relief during the last winter, is a proof that the provision for them is insufficient. From that circumstance I infer that the provision made is disgracefully insufficient."

We shall not be accused of any want of sympathy with the poor, or of in any degree impugning the rights of private charity, when we demur to this. It is not pretended that the 150,000 persons relieved, or any large proportion of them, were houseless poor.

We have reason to believe that a considerable proportion were dock-yard labourers and such like, in the receipt of very high wages, who ought not to have been in distress on the occurrence of a week or two of frost which may be expected in the natural order of events, and therefore should be provided against. But it is the misfortune of indiscriminate relief that it encourages improvidence and teaches men to become beggars. Even the additional rate of a penny in the pound spread over the metropolis, which Mr. Gilbert recommends, might make the process of obtaining relief so easy that in a year or so the distress might be doubled. As it was, last winter so much money was being scattered abroad that the wives of mechanics in full work thought they might as well have a "try" for some of it, and succeeded, no doubt, in more instances than have been made public.

In towns, wages are high, and emulation (if no better feeling is at work) provides amply for the necessities of the poor in times of extraordinary need. The very existence of such Societies as the one of which Mr. Gilbert is secretary proves that we may so far let well alone: it would be a pity to deprive private charity of the opportunities of doing good which it now possesses, and which we believe is upon the whole exercised most beneficially. It is in country villages that our sympathies are most needed. We see there in general a hard-working uncomplaining people, toiling on from day to day on the most scanty wages,