- The House of Lords discussed Archbishop Tait's public Wor-
ship Bill on Monday, in almost the only field-night of the preeent Session. It was severely criticised by :Lord Shaftesbury, who said that while it did not touch . confession it would result in enforcing the Athanasian Creed and every detail of an obsolete ritual. Lord Shaftesbury, though "a Low Churchman, a very Low. Churchman," said solemnly, that even though he should be assured "that for the next half-century there would not be any but Low-Church Bishops," he would not give them the power which this Bill proposes to give to Bishops. Dr. Magee thought better of Bishops, and was very amusing about the demand that Bishops should govern by fatherliness, when there is so very little filialness shown towards them, hut, as we have elsewhere shown, he did not really defend the Bill, but only apologised for it. Even the Duke of Marlborough pooh-poohed the Bill, Earl Nelson thought it very dangerous' Lord Harrowby sanguinely hoped the amendments to be proposed _thielit remove the difficulties in the way of the Bill, Lord Selboine wanted the Bishops to move spontaneously themselves in the regulation of public -Worship, rather than to be moved by-the complaints of par- ishioners, and Lord Salisbury thought nothing could succeed which did not carefully guard the consciences and rights of all the three " schools " in the Church ; and when Dr. Tat rose to reply, it was obvious that he regarded the Government as not very friendly to his .Bill, and no party in the House as its strenuous supporters. It will hardly survive the mingled stimulants and alteratives pressed on it in Committee; —the object of most of its opponents being to transform its vital principle, and of the rest to lop off its limbs.
