THE BISHOP OF MANCHESTER AND THE INDIAN FAMINE.
[TO TIER EDITOR OF TIM "SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—You appear to have misapprehended the meaning of some words of mine, on which you make this comment :—" Even Dr. Thirlwall, while uncertain as to the facts, tells him [the Bishop of Manchester] that had he held his opinions, he should scarcely have had the courage to express them." I also observe that in the same paragraph the question is stated as if it was whether private benevolence could be relied on to effect the object. I was not aware that any one had held that opinion. I myself expressly disclaimed it, and expressed my entire concurrence with the Bishop of Manchester in his main proposition, as to the indispensable need of the most vigorous action on the part of the State. But whether private benevolence could or could not be of any use in supplementing this action was a totally different question. And the substance of what I said was that while I was uncertain, and precisely because I was, and must long remain, uncertain as to the facts, in other words, so long as I was not thoroughly convinced that Lord Lawrence and those who shared his view were in error, I should have shrunk from the responsibility of saying a word which might have the effect of inducing others to keep aloof from this charitable work. That is the utmost extent of moral cawardice with which I can admit myself to be chargeable in this case, and I am not in the least ashamed of it. And this appears to me quite consistent with the high respect which I expressed and feel for the Bishop of Manchester. His opinion is one thing ; the firmness of assurance with which he holds it is another. I might have shared the opinion without the assurance, and in such a case I wished, if I erred, to err on the safe side,—for the saving of life, rather than of money.—! am, Sir, &c., C. Sr. DAVID'S. Abergwili Palace, Carmarthen, March 23.
Previous page
