attaining), to pay you, after many years, this feeble tribute of gratitude and admiration! Never again will Anglicanism produce such a disciple; never, till she is Catholic, will Oxford boast of such a son. ‘“_Ostendent terris hunc tantum fata, neque ultra_ _Esse sinent. Nimium vobis Romana propago_ _Visa potens, superi, propria hæc si dona fuissent_ … _Nec puer Iliaca quisquam de gente Latinos_ _In tantum spe tollet avos: nec Romula quondam_ _Ullo se tantum tellus jactabit alumno._” As I have begun this quotation, I may as well go on with it: ‘“_Heu, pietas! heu, prisca fides! invictaque bello_ _Dextera! non illi se quisquam impune tulisset_ _Obvius armato_ … … _Manibus date lilia plenis_: _Purpureos spargam flores, animamque [sodalis]_ _His saltem accumulem donis, et fungar inani_ _Munere._” To adjust such a character with Catholic facts and Catholic principles is no part of my present object. The reader who takes an interest in this question will find it discussed in Dr. Newman’s _Lectures on Anglican Difficulties_. For me it will be sufficient to take leave of this gifted person in the well-known words: _Cum talis sis, utinam noster esses!_ * * * * * ‘The estimate taken [of the Reformers and] of their work by Mr. Froude, Mr. Keble, and Mr. Newman became sufficiently manifest on the publication of Mr. Froude’s _Remains_, with the remarks prefixed to them by the friends just mentioned. Mr. Froude had described the English Reformers in general, as “a set with whom he wished to have less and less to do.” He declared his opinion that Bishop Jewel was no better than “an irreverent Dissenter,” and expressed himself as sceptical whether Latimer (of whom, as a “Martyr,” he did not wish to speak disrespectfully) were not “something in the Bulteel line.” Dr. Pusey was too humble and forbearing to enter any kind of public protest against statements and views so different from his own. But he was generally believed not to go along with the tenour of these expressions, nor to approve, otherwise than by passive acquiescence, of the publication of those parts of the work in which they were contained…. [Living,] Mr. Froude’s frankness and attractive personal qualities gained from the rising generation of Oxford a favourable hearing for the (to them) original views, which he so ably and dashingly inculcated…. No one can read Mr. Froude’s _Remains_ … without seeing that with him and with those with whom he corresponded, the ethical system of Oxford had exercised no small influence in the formation of mental habits. Those who, like myself, were personally acquainted with Mr. Froude, will remember how constantly he used to appeal to [the] great moral teacher of antiquity, “Old ‘Stotle,” as he used playfully to call him, against the shallow principles of the day. There is a sense, I am convinced, in which the literature of