To

rigidly their faults, to complain of their mode of advocacy, even though its language might sometimes sound harsh, to object to their devotion to so great a work, though we might deem it somewhat narrow and exclusive. But we must plead guilty to some anxiety, lest in seeking to obtain a wider and firmer hold on the uneducated portion of the community, anything should be done to create a distaste for religion in the minds of the more cultured. The influences brought to bear on the minds of our young men to destroy their faith in the Gospel, and repress everything like spiritual feeling, are sufficiently formidable in themselves without our furnishing arguments which are only too ready for our adversaries to employ with fatal effect. The Saturday Review, which sets itself forth as an organ of a certain kind of respectable religionism, but which has no depth of faith, and no earnestness of feeling, which laughs at every manifestation of enthusiasm, and has only the cynic's sneer for the most devoted labours of Christian philanthropy, is ever on the outlook for anything which can give point to the sarcasms which it unceasingly and relentlessly levels against every form of vital godliness. attempt to propitiate such a critic would be as futile as it would be inexpedient, but it is not, therefore, necessary that we should by our indiscretion help him to carry on his work. It has often pained us, when reading some of his comments, severe and excessive as they were, to feel that they were based on a substratum of fact, that to a certain extent we could not deny their justice, and that they would, in virtue of the modicum of truth which they contained, affect most injuriously the minds of the young. We may have no desire to defend the practices assailed, but unfortunately the attacks are conducted in a spirit which rapidly begets an irreverence that extends to the most sacred things, and which cannot fail to lower the spiritual tone. In some a disgust with religious men as unlettered and vulgar fanatics, if not something worse, is awakened, and a quiet respectable pietism which pursues the even tenor of its own way and never disturbs others, comes to be regarded as the true ideal of religion, while in others there grows up an intense aversion to the truth itself. Every one who has had to deal with educated young men must have met with difficulties of this sort, and often have had to deplore that friends of the Gospel have sometimes unconsciously done the work of its enemies. To remove unfriendly impressions when they have once been produced, to correct the mistaken views of Christian doctrines given by men who have never been able to devote time to thought and study, and whose only concern is to say something which shall be striking and effective, to counteract the effect produced by the uncontrolled manifestations of perfervid zeal, is no easy task. It is necessary,

for the Church to remember that she has a two-fold work to do, and that it will require wisdom to prevent one part of it from interfering with the other. Yet between the two there is not in reality any opposition. Variety in the style of treating Scripture truth there must always be, and the several styles will find the classes to which they are specially adapted. But to educated and uneducated alike, there will be freshness in the faithful exhibition of God's truth in its bearing on the various relations of individual, public, and social life; eloquence in language, which though simple is chaste and well chosen, and which, while suited to the capacities of all, provokes the hostility of none; and force in an earnestness which is too manifestly the expression of the heart's deepest feelings to be despised, and too thoroughly under the control of true reverence to become unreasonable and extravagant.

But even were the extravagances of which we have been speaking in this paper, attended with all the advantages their admirers ascribe to them, and were there no abatements to be made from the general estimate of success, we should still object to their being regarded as an example for imitation. There are peculiarities of individual workers, which may really be one secret of their strength, but which it would be simply ridiculous for others to copy. Genius has its own modes of expression and action, occasionally very strange and abnormal, but which are tolerated because of the real power with which they are associated and which may even in some cases contribute to the general effect, but to reproduce these vagaries without any of the compensating excellencies which secure for them forgiveness would only be to excite the ridicule of all. There were preachers of a past generation, and they have one or two successors in this, who were excessively homely in illustration and quaint in style, and whose quaintness sometimes degenerated into something worse, but they held their position despite of drawbacks of this character because of their high qualities of mind and heart, and because also it was felt that the things which were objectionable were the development of an irrepressible natural tendency. Much, too, is to be forgiven to a man, rescued from the depths of vice and profligacy, whom God has endowed with power fitting him to do a certain kind of spiritual service, but who from his want of early culture may easily be betrayed into offences against logic or violations of good taste. But it is a very different thing when men of another mould, and who have enjoyed the benefits of a higher training, hope to gain influence by adopting those peculiarities, and instead of relying upon the thoughtful exposi tion of God's truth, and solemn appeals to the consciences of their hearers, as means of spiritual usefulness, have recourse to expe

CHURCH RATES AND THE EXEMPTION OF DISSENTERS. 371

dients which, as used by them, are certainly no better than claptrap. If insensible to any other appeal the stern logic of facts is pretty sure, sooner or later, to convince such men of the mistake they have committed. They will find that the factitious popularity thus secured is as evanescent as it is worthless, that the success most desired is rarely that which is realized without patient waiting, and that the applauses of the thoughtless crowd or even of the few better, but hardly wiser men, who clutch at immediate results, and are content to accept them as a decisive test of the character of the work, would be a poor compensation for a loss of the approval of those whose piety, wisdom, and experience should command the highest deference, or for the conviction that the good itself has been so unwisely done that it has given to the enemy occasion to rejoice.

CHURCH RATES AND THE "EXEMPTION OF

DISSENTERS."

A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PARLIAMENTARY

NONCONFORMIST ELECTOR.

CANDIDATE AND A

Candidate. I have called, Mr. Elector, to express the hope that I shall have your vote at the coming Election.

Elector. With all my heart, Sir, I have voted for every Liberal candidate for the last thirty years, and I shall esteem it a privilege to vote for you. I consider the possession of the franchise a great trust. All our laws depend upon the manner in which that trust is discharged.

Candidate.-I am deeply obliged, and more than obliged, for I have been a good deal discouraged in my canvassing. I understand that you are a Nonconformist, and that you have some influence with other Nonconformist electors. I am sorry to say that many of these are reluctant in promising me their support, and if they should continue in their present opinions, the result of the election will be rather doubtful. I mention this in confidence, and, as one of the old Liberals of the borough, you will not, of course, repeat it. I cannot remove their objections; but if they know that you are going to vote for me perhaps they will relinquish them. I wish you were on my Committee, and I must tell Mr. Liberal that he has been guilty

of a great oversight in not asking you to serve. too late. I am sure you will not refuse me?

But it it is not

Elector. Oh, Sir, Mr. Liberal knows that my vote is safe, and that if anything should be wanted from me, I shall be ready to do it without being placed on the Committee. But I cannot understand what you say. The Nonconformists not vote for you? Why, Sir, they are all liberal to the back-bone. What is it they object to?

Candidate. They object to my views on the Church-rate question.

Elector. But why? I am sorry I could not be at your meeting, but I have read your speech, and I do not see anything to object to. Ah! here it is. You say you will "support the principles of religious liberty;" that you "disapprove of persecution for religious opinions;" and that you will be glad to see an "equitable settlement of the Church-rate question." That is all we want, Sir. The late member voted with us on all ecclesiastical measures. I do not think he was once absent from a division on Sir John Trelawny's Bill. Of course you believe in the abolition of Church-rates?

Candidate.-Well, Mr. Elector, I am a Churchman, and I do not think they ought to be abolished; but I am in favour of the exemption of Dissenters. I would relieve every man from payment of this rate who could state that he conscientiously objected to paying it, and I do not think more ought to be asked.

Elector-Now I understand why the persons to whom you referred just now decline to support you, and I quite agree with them. We can exempt ourselves without any Act of Parliament. I am sorry that I must recal my promise to vote for you, but I am more sorry that any person should present himself before the Liberals of this borough who is not willing to vote for religious liberty. I must say, Sir, that I think you are sailing under false colours. You are not in favour of religious liberty, and it is a stretch of language to call yourself, in these days, a Liberal. With your views, you will vote with the Tories, if you should be returned to Parliament, on the only questions that now divide the two political parties.

Candidate.-Excuse me, for a moment. I stated plainly in my address that I should go into Parliament as a follower of Lord Palmerston, and he does not support your measures.

Elector-Well, there are Liberals like Mr. Bright who say that Lord Palmerston is only a warming-pan for Mr. Disraeli, and there are Tories like Mr. Du Cane who say that he is a very good Conservative, but you are more Conservative than he is. He has never, in all the nine divisions on Sir John Trelawny's Bill, that have taken place during the present Parliament

voted against it, and he has few times in this Parliament voted for it. So you will not even be a follower of Lord Palmerston on this question.

Candidate.-Well, I suppose Lord Palinerston has succumbed to political exigencies or to public opinion; but, as I said before, I am a Churchman, and I cannot vote for abolition.

Elector.-A Churchman? So are more than three hundred of the members of the House of Commons who have voted with Sir John Trelawny. I am almost surprised to hear that you are a Churchman when you say that you are in favour of the exemption of Dissenters.

Candidate.-Why?

Elector. Because you will not find even the clergy with you. When Canon Miller was examined before the House of Lords Committee he said, "I have never mentioned the exemption plan in a large company of clergymen and found it received with anything like the favour with which I have been led to regard it myself. I believe it is our only chance, and if it be not followed the rate is gone."

Candidate.-Exactly so, and so do I.

Elector.-Just so. Now I see where you are.

I shall not vote for you.

Most certainly

Candidate. But have you no other objection? Because it strikes me that you talk only as a Dissenter, and I cannot be expected to sympathise with you.

Elector.-Well, to repeat your own language, all the Liberals in this borough sympathise with me, that is to say, with my views, and about three hundred and forty Liberal Members of Parliament sympathise with them. I do not think, therefore, that they are merely dissenting views. As you do not seem to know that there are other objections I will give them in the language of Churchmen. Archdeacon Hale put one objection very strongly in his examination before the Lord's Committee. He said, "I do not see why a principle should be applied to the Church which it is impossible to apply to other State matters. It would be introducing into the English jurisprudence a perfectly new principle, and I think one very dangerous to the State." Of course it would. If the State should recognise the validity of the objection of an individual person to pay a tax because he does not approve of it, there would be very soon an end of all taxation. Mr. Walpole, in introducing his Bill in 1859, took the same view when he said, "If you admit the principle in this instance you must also admit it in reference to the general taxation of the country."

Candidate.-Stop a moment. Mr. Walpole's Bill exempted

Dissenters.

Elector.-I know that; for, after arguing against any admission