South Canterbury Times, THURSDAY, JULY 20, 1893. NEWS OF THE DAY.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 7267, 20 July 1893, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, THURSDAY, JULY 20, 1893. NEWS OF THE DAY.

The half-yearly meeting of the Gladstone Lodge, 1.0.0. F., Fairlie, woa held on July 12tb, when there was a large attendance of members. District D.G.M. Bro. G. Donn attended, and installed the following officers for the ensuing term '• —N.G., Bro. J. Batterson ; Y.G., Bro. J. V, Morgan ; Sec, Bro, A. J, Dopping j Tress., Bro. J. Binney ; Warden, Bro. I. Bliasott.

.Application was recently made to the Supreme Court to set add® the nonsuit which bad been granted iu the action South Canterbury Building and Investment Company (Limited) v. Stumbles, on the ground that the judgment was based upon a misconception of the facts. The application was heard last week, and judgment was yesterday delivered by Mr Justice Danniston granting the application, setting aside the nonsuit and entering up jugdment for the plaintiff company for £3OO and costs. By this judgment the validity of the liquidation proceedings and of the position of the liquidators are affirmed. Messrs Knubley and Kaymond represented the plaintiff company, and Mr White the defendant.

j We hare received a oupy of a pamphlet, entitled 41 A Beply to the Lecture delivered by the Rev. 0. ET. Garland on * The Bearing of Higher Criticism on Leading Hvangelical Doctrines.’ ” The author is Mr William Shepherd Allen M.A., at present residing in Auckland, the Bev. Mr Garland’s lecture was delivered in March last, before the Wesleyan Conference at Dunedin, and contained a great d«al that was clearly at variance with the fundamental doctrines of the Wesleyan Methodist Church, or of any Christian Church, The subject is not one that can be diecussed at length in our columns, but we may say generally that the lecture, with a certain pretence of depth, struck us as being remarkably shallow, and also as grossly unfair, r in that it claimed for the ** higher critics ” an amount of agreement amongst themselves which baa no existence in fact. This reply by Mr Allen is a much more logical produD' tion; indeed, its chief, though not sole, merit Is that it proves that the Bev Mr Garland, from the materials which he aooepted as trustworthy, ought to have drawn conclusions from which he shrank There was far more of German rationalism than of Wesleyan methodism, or Christianity, in Mr Garland’s lecture ; and a* ho is regarded as a burning and shining I'gbt ju the Wesleyan Ministry, and as his loefuro wa* delivered before the Conference, and he claimed for it a '‘semi-official" character, it is remarkable (that months elapsed without eliciting a * disclaimer of his leeching, and that the reply,

now that it has come, is from a private source. Mr Allen’s pamphlet extends to forty-five pages, and will no doubt have a wide circulation, especially amongst members of the Church to which both the lecturer and bis critic belong.