idea that an outward conformity with the ceremonies of the Church of England constitutes a person a true member of the church of Christ, that they have instituted in their respective parishes societies, not unlike that formed by Baxter at Kidderminster; in which the members met for social wor ship, for the advancement of charities, and for communion with their minister previous to their receiving the Lord's Supper. There can be no doubt that this system has occasioned very happy results, at least for a season, in an increased attention to religious subjects, in those parishes in which it has been adopted. Still we must not shut our eyes to the fact, that it has a tendency to establish a test dependent on man's judgment; and that the abuse of such a test is spiritual pride among those who are enrolled, and hostile opposition in those who are excluded. Now, though, when judiciously conducted, immediate good may have appeared, yet the seeds of evil are so necessarily mixed up with a system of this kind, that after the lapse of a few years, or at the change of the minister of the parish, discord, schism-in fact, any thing but church union-is likely to be the result. I would therefore rather, under present circumstances, consider the clergyman as the direct organ of religious instruction in his parish. Nor am I anxious to arm him with the power of inflicting church censures, which would probably lead to the injudicious exercise of authority. I should tremble for the spiritual good of a parish, if much temporal authority-for ecclesiastical censure is temporal power-were placed in the hands of clergymen, even though they should intend to exercise it for the advancement of the moral conduct of their flocks. Such power may occasionally facilitate the labours of the ministry, but more frequently it shuts the door to religious influence. We are not called on to be lords over God's heritage, but we are to beseech men, in Christ's stead, to be reconciled to God. Young men, who are without much personal influence, are generally the most anxious for some arrangement of this kind; but I believe we should diminish their power of doing good in their respective parishes by giving them the power of legally enforcing obedience, even to many things right in themselves. The situation which a clergyman holds in his parish is highly favourable for the religious improvement of his own heart, and for influencing his flock to adopt the tempers and dispositions of the Christian character. I cannot say, therefore, that I wish in this respect to see great alterations in our present regulations. The clergyman may refuse to receive improper persons at the sacrament table; he may also exhort his people, in public or private, to turn to God, or to be reconciled to their neighbours; and by a diligent exercise of this universally allowed power he may be of much greater service to his parish than by exemplary punishments.

But with regard to the question, whether the laws respecting Episcopal authority over the clergy need to be altered, I feel no hesitation. Not only are the days of episcopal tyranny passed, but so relaxed is our discipline, that no restraint can now be put on the negligence or immorality of an incumbent. The conduct of the clergy, it may be said, generally renders the necessity of such laws less apparent: but surely, taking the matter at the best, there are many cases which require coercion. The question would be, in whose hands should this power be placed? The clergy generally are sufficiently well educated and enlightened to make them the instruments of their own government: establish, therefore, a kind of Court of Inquiry, and make the decision of the court, when sanctioned by the bishop, binding; admitting an appeal to the archbishop of the province. Much of the difficulty and odium of episcopal government would then be removed; and, while public opinion is what we now find it, there would not be wanting persons duly qualified who would be ready to undertake the

office, nor would they dare to be tyrannical. I believe this is the legitimate method of using public opinion, and the only way in which it can be very serviceable to the purposes of true religion. It would at once encourage serious thought, and direct it, in the clergy. It would make the people feel that they have an interest in the church; that they have a remedy if the clergyman grossly neglects his duty: and yet the nature of the court would not encourage frivolous complaints, while it checked party prejudices. I have heard many objections raised to this method of proceeding: That from its constitution it would be liable to abuse; That the members of such a court would be influenced by the authority of the archdeacon, and by the hopes of preferment from the bishop; and, That it would soon become an instrument of arbitrary power in the hands of Episcopacy. I do not see the force of such reasoning; for the current is directly setting in the opposite direction. Bishops have now no authority at all; and I do not see how their power could be more effectually extended, and at the same time checked from tyranny, than by establishing a local court to collect evidence, and report on it to the bishop. I am sure, as far as I have seen, that public opinion, with proper checks, would generally ensure a court of enlightened and equitable individuals. With the establishment of such an ecclesiastical court, I think a very simple code of regulations might be adopted; differences between clergymen would be settled, accusations from parishioners investigated, and the whole proceeding simplified. All this, I admit, is not religion; nor is a man, of necessity, a faithful steward of the mysteries of God, just because he keeps so far within the bounds of professional regularity as not to be amenable to church censures; but, as a secondary engine of ecclesiastical regulation, such matters are worthy of attention, and even in the most pure church ought not to be neglected. It would, however, be a poor affair, after all, to secure decorum and statute duty, if our clergy did not rise to something infinitely higher. This thought crosses one's path in every suggestion upon Church Reform in its outward relations: for what would be the husk without the kernel; the casket without the jewel; and the externals of a well-regulated church, without the faithful exhibition of the doctrines of the Gospel, the spiritual duties of the pastoral life, and the salvation of the souls of the people?

It is often said, and with truth, that it is easy to overthrow an established institution, very difficult to remodel it. A person who begins by pulling down, generally finds, when he wishes to rebuild, that his materials have been wasted while he has been deliberating where they should be placed. If we begin by destruction, we shall encourage spoliation; if we begin by inquiry, by shewing what parts need support, and take nothing down till we have marked the place where it is to be applied, we shall not only satisfy men's minds that we seek what is right, but we shall save what is lawfully our own. But, then, we must do it honestly. The strength of the enemies of the church consists in the abuses of the church. From many causes-among others the enormous debt which now lies on the landed property of the country-there is, in many quarters, a restlessness under existing circumstances, and a desire for revolution; and from the very weakness of the Church Establishment in the opinions of the people, she is the more exposed to attack. It is not her doctrines that are disliked; it is not her clergy, individually, who are unpopular; but it is that the eyes of people are open to her abuses: her revenues tempt the distressed and the unprincipled, and her disinclination to reform abuses weakens the hands and deadens the hearts of her sincere friends.

One of the first steps, then, I should propose, would be a new Valor Ecclesiasticus; and I would have the real amount of church preferment,

known all over the country. I would then establish a court of inquiry, to ascertain the best methods of rendering the bishops more stationary, by a more equal distribution of the episcopal funds. I would endeavour, as much as possible, to prevent their emoluments arising from the tithes of parishes, which are thus unjustly impoverished, and deprived often of their legitimate religious superintendence, by the appropriation of tithes to ecclesiastical purposes entirely unconnected with themselves. I cannot but think that emoluments sufficient for the support of the episcopal character and dignity might be supplied from the estates attached to the different sees, if a more equal distribution of their property were made; but even if this were not found to be the case, still, before tithes were taken from livings, ample provision should be made for the discharge of the duties of the parish from which these funds were drawn. That the incomes of some of the bishoprics are too large for the good of the Church, as well as too small in other cases, I fully believe: while, then, I would render them more equal, I would impose a considerable fine on every translation, amounting, at least, to half the yearly value.

In the case of deans and chapters I should perhaps be less sparing in my operations. I would, by law, remove from them all payments of tithes, all impropriations, and give them to their respective livings; and I would enforce residence in the diocese, by joining some large living to each stall, and making the occupants act the part of archdeacons, or suffraganbishops, in their respective districts. Their number would be diminished, but their usefulness would be increased. This is a most decided change, but I would not have it immediate. The alteration should take place as the members of chapters fell off; not allowing the vacancies to be filled up till the number did not exceed the number contained in the proposed alteration and I would distinctly mark what impropriations should fall away from the chapter, as each vacancy occurred; and to what archdeaconry the stall should be attached. In almost every case, the living from which the tithes are taken to be applied to the funds of the chapter, is in the gift of the chapter itself: so that, by a wise arrangement, the members of the chapter might enjoy the funds of the chapter; only they would be restrained from holding additional preferment. By this, likewise, many very small livings would be greatly increased.

In all our plans for benefiting smaller livings, we must remember that the great effect is to be produced by means of Queen Anne's Bounty: and its efficiency, if a real tenth of preferments above 500l. or a graduated payment varying according to their real value, were laid on all, would be immediately increased. As for the first-fruits, I would not demand them, from the fact that the exaction would almost ruin poor men. In the exchange of preferments I would demand them strictly. Of course, in all reforms, whether relating to bishops, chapters, or private clergymen, existing interests should be honestly respected; but the first change would open the door for amendments; and in many cases even the present occupants might consent to arrange matters on the new system. By such means the necessity of pluralities would be gradually done away with; and I feel so decidedly averse from them, that I can hardly trust my judgment. I feel so strongly that they are wrong, as they are at present admitted in our Church, that I would immediately limit them in distance very decidedly-perhaps they should be contiguous-and in value, as soon as the means for increasing small livings could be brought into effect, so as to take away the present excuse for holding two livings. I think the value a point of doubtful obligation; and there are cases in which two contiguous livings might be held together; but the distance seems to me obligatory. I was called upon early in life to decide whether CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 369.

4 E

I would draw advantages from preferment, when I could not perform the duties myself. I have cause to thank God that I refused; and though I am a poor man now, I can affirm, that, so far am I from regretting it, my opinion on this point has been almost yearly strengthened: and I should rejoice if any arrangement were made which would hold out a prospect that no part of our ecclesiastical labours shall be committed to a deputy, except as an assistant to a resident incumbent. The order of nature has appointed that one man shall be under another, and that in every class there shall be gradations of rank; and any attempt to make a different arrangement in the Church, would, I am convinced, be attended with much evil. Yet the system has been so abused, that, instead of Christian subordination, there is considerable discontent among many of the working and influential clergy; and the spirit of worldly aggrandisement is too apparent in many of our upper clergy, to make the Christian view our present system with that satisfaction which ought to be the consequence if her funds were more wisely distributed. Great she is now, with all her faults; and blessed she has been, and will be. To her the Christian world look for support; to her the heathen call for instruction; and her very enemies are forced to admire the venerable strength of her building. Are we, then, to weaken her by neglect, and allow the worldly to revel in her treasures? If we are true to ourselves, we need not fear the assaults of man. God will never leave us, nor forsake us.

DR. CHALMERS ON HOME COLONIZATION, PAUPERISM, AND COTTAGE ALLOTMENTS.

For the Christian Observer.

THE question of the provision for the poor and the labouring classes is so important, and so necessary to be well understood in all its bearings, especially by the parochial clergy, that I am glad to find it undergoing some discussion in the pages of the Christian Observer. One branch of it— namely, home colonization, the cow and cottage system, with the assignment of parochial allotments of land-deserves to be thoroughly investigated; more particularly as exaggerated statements have been made relative to its efficiency, which, if acted upon, can only end in disappointment. I would respectfully submit for inquiry the following important arguments of Dr. Chalmers upon the question; for the deliberate opinions of such a man, whether conclusive or not, deserve serious consideration. Dr. Chalmers may be thought to exhibit a hard view; but truth, even though unwelcome, is preferable to specious error. The argument will suffer by being presented in shreds, but it will be sufficiently intelligible to the attentive reader; and I see not how he can avoid its painful conclusions. "A glut of human beings, nothing can prevent, but the reign of prudence and principle amongst families; and nothing can correct, but the famine, and disease, and war, which are so many chastisements inflicted by the hand of nature, on human guilt and human improvidence.

"It is vain to say that, in these circumstances, a transference of labour should be made from manufactures to agriculture. We have already seen, that there is not room for an indefinite employment of labourers in the one department more than in the other. The population who are now working on the land last entered, or on the land that is placed along the extreme margin of cultivation, only obtain from it a produce which feeds the agricultural labourers and their secondaries, and which remunerates the capitalists. An additional population, if it anticipate and ex

ceed the natural progress of agriculture, as already explained, must enter upon land of inferior quality to this; which land could only continue to be cultivated with loss to the capitalists, or by means of an under-fed or inferiorly-maintained population. It is thus, that there can be demonstrated to exist a limit all round to the employment of labourers. And for the right direction of philanthropy, for the purpose of giving effect to her devices and her doings, to save the wasteful or the pernicious expenditure of her powers, it is well that all the false lights should be extinguished, which may have heretofore bewildered her, and that she should be no longer misled by a delusive confidence in impotent or fruitless expedients.

"There is nothing more fitted to inspire this delusive confidence, than the doctrine which we now endeavour to expose. It suggests the idea of an indefinite harbourage for the people,-let them multiply and increase to whatever extent they may. It gives a virtue unlimited to credit and commerce, and the enterprise of merchants; and removes from contemplation that barrier to the extension of agriculture, which must ever prove a barrier, alike firm and impracticable, to the extension of trade. It overlooks the obvious truth, that there may be too much production, just because there may be too many producers. It is this which may give rise to a general glut, at least of all but the first necessaries of life. It is but a poor evasion, that because there is a deficiency in these, the glut is not universal; so that if all sorts of products were included, the doctrine has still a foundation to rest upon. It needs but one qualification to meet this. Generally, and with one single exception, even that of food, there may be an excess of products: and universally, or inclusive of food and of all things else, there may be an excess of productive effort. We shall at length come to a limit, beyond which the expense incurred in the fabrication must exceed the expense of the thing fabricated. At, or rather beyond, the natural margin of cultivation, we see this truth in all its nakedness; stripped of those accompaniments which, in the shape of marketing, and money, and exchanging processes, but obscure the character of the proceeding without essentially changing it. Then it becomes quite palpable,-for then the food which has been consumed by workmen, during the process of their labour, exceeds in quantity the food which they raise. There is no mere distribution which can avert this calamity; a calamity that, wherever it occurs, is felt throughout the whole community of labourers. And a scanty return for the labour bestowed on the production of the one commodity of food, is very generally associated with a glut of all other commodities. Commensurate to a smallness of produce in the department of agriculture, is there a smallness of price in the department of commerce and manufactures. When immediately, and without exchange, there is a scanty return for the last agricultural labour expended on our overwrought fields, then mediately, and with exchange, is there a like scanty return for all manufacturing labour, and that because of our overstocked markets. It is thus that starvation, or much severe distress, may be realised from the want of first necessaries; in the midst of general abundance, both as to the second necessaries and luxuries of life. This, if there be not a virtuous and well-educated commonalty, is the ultimate state of every industrious nation; a state from which it can only be saved, not by the multiplication of its products, but by a wholesome and moral restraint on the multiplication of its people."

"But though the progress of cultivation, and the produce extracted by labourers from the last and farthest margin of it, do truly represent both the progress in numbers, and the state in respect to comfort, of our operative population; and though, when viewed in this way, the conclusion