e
horrible apprehension that whig ministers might possibly have to fill
all the regius chairs and all the sees for a whole generation to come.

Not less important than the theology of the Oxford divines in its
influence on Mr. Gladstone's line of thought upon things ecclesiastical
was the speculation of Coleridge on the teaching and polity of a
national church. His fertile book on _Church and State_ was given to the
world in 1830, four years before his death, and this and the ideas
proceeding from it were the mainspring, if not of the theology of the
movement, at least of Mr. Gladstone's first marked contribution to the
stirring controversies of the time. He has described the profound effect
upon his mind of another book, the _Treatise on the Church of Christ_,
by William Palmer of Worcester College (1838), and to the end of his
life it held its place in his mind among the most masterly performances
of the day in the twin hemispheres of theology and church polity.[95]
Newman applauded the book for its magnificence of design, and
undoubtedly it covers much ground, including a stiff rejection of
Locke's theory of toleration, and the assertion of the strong doctrine
that the Christian prince has a right by temporal penalties to protect
the church from the gathering together of the froward and the
insurrection of wicked doers. It has at least the merit, so far from
universal in the polemics of that day, of clear language, definite
propositions, and formal arguments capable of being met by a downright
yes or no.[96] The question, however, that has often slumbered yet never
dies, of the right relations between the Christian prince or state and
the Christian church, was rapidly passing away from logicians of the
cloister.

Note to page 167.

'_Hawarden, Chester, November 9, 1856._--MY LORD BISHOP,--Your
lordship will probably be surprised at receiving a letter from me,
as a stranger. The simple purpose of it is to discharge a debt of
the smallest possible importance to you, yet due I think from me,
by expressing the regret with which I now look back on my
concurrence in a vote of the University of Oxford in the year 1836,
condemnatory of some of your lordship's publications. I did not
take actual part in the vote; but upon reference to a journal kept
at the time, I find that my absence was owing to an accident.

'For a good many years past I hav