best friends I had, after speaking at every convenient opportunity in the most exalted terms of many traits of my character, generally ended with a deep sigh, and the following language, uttered in the most dismal tones conceivable ;-" But-I fear he is a long way from the truth."

There was one class of men, (the clergy) it is true, who did not fail to come to me privately, and sometimes in a truly christian spirit. They however occasionally fell into such a dictatorial attitude and manner as left me in disgust. The two points on which they assumed that I was radically defective were in regard to the great doctrines of human depravity and the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. I was not openly charged with rejecting the Trinity, and had the charge been made, I should have evaded it by equivocal language, as I had not yet acquired courage enough to avow publicly my real sentiments on this point; but I did not hesitate boldly and unequivocally to deny the two former charges. Our discussions, however, usually terminated about where they commenced; only I became more and more disgusted with the dictatorial manner in which I fancied myself treated. I was unwilling to be addressed at the close of an interview with 66 Well, I hope God will set you right," for it

seemed like being treated as an inferior; yet I scorned to reply in the same language.

One of these gentlemen, however was peculiarly unfortunate in his manner of addressing me. He was nearly a stranger in the place, and I think it was only the second time I met with him that he accosted me as follows, almost without any previous compliment ;-"My dear sir, why don't you take a decided stand in favor of religion? What a pity your influence should be lost, in a place where it is so much needed.”

This was a mode of salutation I did not expect, and I was so much surprised that I said but little in reply. I only assured him that I thought my influence so far as I had influence at all, was by no means lost to the cause of religion.

He did not, at that time, accuse me of heresy. But a few days afterwards he called at my room. When he knocked, I was writing, and my manuscript lay spread open as he entered. After a few common-place remarks; "You have something there," said he, "which looks almost like a sermon ;"—at the same time begging to know what it was. I told him I was putting down a few thoughts on intemperance.

He asked me to read a few lines. I complied with his request, and read a few pages. I could

not help wondering, however, what could be the meaning of such a request, from a man professing to be sane. But my anxiety was soon relieved, for he inquired whether I had ever been in the habit of writing on the subject of religion; and when I answered in the negative, he urged me to write on some particular subject. he, "to suggest a topic. conversion."

"I will venture" said Suppose you write on

"But," said he,

I told him I could not promise that I would; perhaps I might. "if you were going to take up the subject, how would you proceed." I assured him that I was so little accustomed to putting my thoughts together on the subject of religion, that I could not answer him without reflection. He repeated the request that I would write on the subject; observing that Dr. Chalmers, of Scotland, was converted from Socinianism to the truth, while writing the article 66 Christianity" for the Edinburgh Encyclopedia. Having failed to draw me into free conversation, he at length left me.

A few days afterwards, I met him again at his boarding house. Here we entered into a short discussion on the inspiration of the scriptures. He took the usual evangelical ground, while I maintained that the books of the Old and New

Testament were not, and could not be any thing more than the record of a revelation. I do not think I was very successful in defending my position; but the dispute brought me no nearer what I now conceive to be the truth. On the contrary, I was only the more strongly prejudiced against the cause which the minister was advocating. Should this meet the eye of any minister of the gospel, I hope he will learn the necessity-if he is yet in his ignorance—of treating these fastidious folks with more caution. "Wise as serpents and harmless as doves," should be the ministers'

motto.

But the secret was now out. It was confidently reported, and to a considerable extent believed, not only at home, but in adjoining towns, that I was a Unitarian. I strenuously denied that I was a Unitarian in any proper sense of the term, but only an inquirer. I maintained that I did not believe precisely with any sect whatever, and yet admitted and believed the principal tenets of all. This was indeed more than half true; and yet my distant friends and acquaintances in the land of Unitarianism, claimed me as a convert, and I did not undeceive them.

My reasons for this were various. One was a consciousness that I had in some respects already

passed beyond Unitarianism, and entered the confines of Rationalism or Deism. I knew that if I was persecuted for Unitarianism there was a city of refuge to flee to; but if I became suspected of Deism, or Skepticism, the case was a doubtful one. On this point I was not disappointed; for I learned about this time that "liberal" Christians were as exclusive as other sects, to those who went beyond a certain boundary; and this boundary, said an individual on whom I could rely, “Channing must settle.' It was therefore my opinion, as well as that of others, that for the present, Unitarianism was a safe resting place.

My efforts at making converts were by no means remitted. Day and night I devoted my spare moments, either in thought, word, or deed, to the "cause." How much might Christians effect if they were half as active as some of the "enlightened, deists" of our country! A few are so, I well know; but taken as a body, I know of no class of citizens at the present day, notwithstanding all the noise which prevails, who are making as much sacrifice according to their means, as some of the disciples of free inquiry" now are, and for some time have been. On this point I do not speak unadvisedly; for I know