two living companions. After a single speech on the majority report by R. H. Miller, and one on the minority report by John Wise, the matter was postponed for one year.

In 1891 both reports were thoroughly discussed and both were rejected by the meeting. Brother Robert's defense of his position was one of the strongest efforts that he ever made. The question was left as it had been until 1898, when a decision was passed that gave the right to receive into the church divorced persons if it could be clearly shown that the cause of separation was fornication. This answer has not given entire satisfaction, but it is probably as nearly right as any that we will get for some time.

NONCONFORMITY.

On the question of nonconformity to the world Brother Robert always spoke with no uncertain sound. He believed pride to be one of the greatest enemies to the church. He believed that the Annual Meeting had a right to advise and pass judgment concerning the attire of the members. The church is a much safer guide to follow than the dictates of fashion. When the progressive element opposed decisions on this subject, he stood firmly against opening any gap for the worldly customs to enter the church.

He was interested, however, not simply in the external but also in the internal conditions. When the question came up at Hagerstown concerning the wearing of gold-framed spectacles, he was serving on the Standing Committee for the last time. He said to Brother D. L. Miller, who sat by his side, that it was useless to lop off a few branches here and there; better get at

the root, and as the heart is the seat of pride, there is the place to work. He did not oppose a decision against worldlyism, but his mind was broad enough to see that after all men must be taught the principles of conformity to Christ and the church, if these principles are to be lived out in their lives.

THE CHURCH NAME.

Brother Robert's last speech in Conference was against changing the name of the church. His main objection to change was that the brethren had not agreed on any name that would give more satisfaction than the old name, German Baptist Brethren. His position has proved to be right. Had the Conference adopted some of the names proposed, there would have been just as much dissatisfaction as ever. As it was, the old name was retained until 1907, when unexpectedly and almost unanimously, the name was changed to what appears to please all, "The Church of the Brethren." This was not, as many thought, a new name, for in some of the early publications the name was frequently applied to the church.

Brother Robert did not covet official standing at the Annual Meeting. He was moderator but once and reading clerk twice. He admitted that he was not the man for moderator because he had too many speeches to make. He preferred to be free from official duties. He was of greatest service in keeping order in the Conference by his ready grasp of the essential points and by his ability to make the matter clear to others.

He was an able man to help settle difficulties in the churches. Few men were sent oftener on these unpleasant tasks than he. He was nearly always fore

man of the committee on which he acted. In some years much of his time was taken up in this work, going to as many as a dozen different places in all parts of the Brotherhood. In 1878 he and Brother Quinter were appointed to go to California to help settle difficulties there, but on account of his poor health they never went.

He experienced some trying ordeals. On one occasion, in Maryland, his committee was locked out of the meetinghouse by the elders to whose congregation he had been sent. Not to be outwitted, he at once announced the council for the grove near by. The council was held, with a large number present, and the mission successfully accomplished. He was once summoned to attend court at Dayton, Ohio. A case was being tried in which some of the Progressive Brethren were attempting to hold the church property, claiming that they were the original church. It was Brother Robert's task to prove to the court what the original church was. Though he had able lawyers opposing him, he easily held his own and received the decision of the court in his favor.

As foreman of committees he was very resourceful in meeting a trying situation. He could frequently suggest compromises by which all contending parties could be satisfied. He had the happy faculty of stating a proposition in such a way that it would give the least possible offense. An exciting or angry speech could never disturb his calm demeanor. His most effective means of handling a brother who was out of order was to let him make his speech, and then pass on as though the speech was merely a parenthetical expression.

CHAPTER VIII.

A PREACHER OF THE GOSPEL.

Brother Robert was elected to the ministry by the unanimous vote of the church. Surely the choice was made by the direction of the Holy Spirit. He accepted the call with a deep appreciation of its sacredness and importance. Though at different times he was a farmer, debater, educator, author and editor, yet, he was above all other things, a preacher of the Gospel. Those who knew him most intimately probably remember most vividly his ministerial work.

He preached well from the first but he also gave evidence of continual growth. Those who heard him then testify to his power in the pulpit. After ten years' experience he visited Virginia, where he preached near the place of the Conference. Elder Daniel Hays, then a young man, gives us his impression of Brother Robert, in the following letter:

"It was in the year of 1869 that Annual Meeting was held near Salem, Va., and I had stopped at Bonsacks to attend the preaching service at this place during the week preceding Conference. While here Brother R. H. Miller preached one day in the forenoon. using as his text Acts 16:30: 'Sirs, what must I do to be saved?' It was easy to see that he was full of his subject, but he made no effort to impress this fact upon his audience by look or attitude either before or during the delivery of his sermon. He was perfectly

natural. Well do I remember the glow of his expressive countenance, the twinkle of his eye and the steady flow of his thrilling words. He made no effort to shine by witty sayings, neither did he aim to clothe his strong points in striking colors; it was more like a refreshing downpour of rain upon the thirsty ground on a midsummer day. Then he had no distinguishing attitude nor gesture; it seemed rather a graceful and harmonious movement of his entire person in the delivery of his theme. Fully three-fourths of his sermon formed an introduction to the doctrine of his text. The self-sufficiency of the Bible as its own expositor was never more fully set forth. The Acts of the Apostles was shown to be in full accord with the teaching of our Lord as given in the Gospels. The brightest intellect could find matter too high for him to reach in the Sacred Scriptures while its saving truths came within the grasp of the simplest minds.

"Then from the I of the text and the what do of the text, he proceeded to its ultimate purpose, to be saved, and clinched the attention of his audience to a clearcut doctrinal statement drawn from the answer of Paul and Silas to the jailer's inquiry, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.' On the day of Pentecost when the Jews asked the apostles What shall we do?' Peter replied by saying. 'Repent and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.' These Jews were believers, but they were sinners and needed repentance and baptism for the remission of sins that they might receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. When Ananias