shall consider the claims of that, which has now been formed for a century, to promote the sacred cause of the propagation of the Gospel.

This is a chartered body, established under the sanction of the Church, for the purpose of extending Christianity among our colonies. These present a wide field for missionary exertions, and it is possible we should do better if we first confined our labors to our own dominions; on the same principle of action which induced both Christ and his Apostles to preach to the Jews before they went among the Gentiles. By supporting the society we unite our triple duties. As subjects, we should violate no law, infringe no custom, offend no authority, for it is a chartered body. As churchmen, we should encourage neither schism, indifference, nor error: we should promote the cause of the Establishment and maintain its influence, for this Society is approved and supported by all the bishops of England. As Christians, we should fulfil our duty of sending out the word of God, with its authorised interpreter, to many millions of heathens.

Such are the claims of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Though I cannot for myself imagine the possibility of an objection to this society, I will suppose, for the sake of the argument, that the millions of unconverted heathens now subject to our power are too few for the exercise of that enlightened benevolence which would embrace the word. How ought we to proceed, if such be our conviction?

The conduct I would recommend in this case to our rich and great men, is drawn from two admirable precedents. One, the Church at Jerusalem, the other, the example of our ancestors in the reign of William.

When the Church at Jerusalem was so united that all its members were " of one heart and one soul," they that were enabled to contribute to the good of others brought their donations and laid them at the Apostles' feet. Whatever benefit they proposed to accomplish, their intentions, their plans, and their revenues were submitted to the Church in its corporate form. Individual exertions were combined for the common good, and referred to the disposal of their ecclesiastical superiors. There was no liberal, candid union with error. There were no half measures to secure the applause of the people, and preserve a nominal respect for the Apostles, while by utter indifference to their authority divisions were promoted in the Church. They were of one heart and one soul, and having but one object they had but one purse.

The second example I would recommend to the notice of professed churchmen is that of our ancestors in the reign of William. They followed the plan of the Church of Jerusalem. The efforts

of Churchmen, at that period, were rather discountenanced than promoted by the ruling powers; yet at that time some few pious. individuals, pitying the ignorance of the heathen world, resolved to attempt some means of extending among them the blessings of civilisation and the knowledge of Christianity. However zealous they were to do good, they did not presume to act in ecclesiastical affairs without the sanction of their bishops. They obtained a charter for the propagation of the Gospel, under the protection of their 'government and their Church. Our duty therefore is, either to support their society, or acting upon their plans, to obtain Episcopal authority for the extension of that charter. My own opinion is, that this latter mode of proceeding is unnecessary. Surely we are not required to send our missionaries to the strangers of Zealand and Polynesia, when millions under our own protection are dying in their ignorance and detestable superstitions!

If the Church of England were united, its members would unhesitatingly pursue this plan of benefitting the world. If we are Churchmen, we must act decidedly with our Church. Hundreds

of thousands of pounds have been collected in England to bless the world with Christian knowledge. Yet how little has been done! Had these immense sums been submitted to ecclesiastical disposal; had every effort to enlighten the heathen been directed by authority; had bishops, priests, and deacons been established as the infant societies required; had one law of faith, of righteousness, and discipline been observed, supported by the wealth of England, and the continued influence of Episcopal power, we have every reason to believe, from the success of the Gospel in the pri mitive ages, that our exertions in the cause of Christianity would have been more abundantly crowned with the Divine Blessing.

How incalculable are the advantages that would result from this conduct. "Example is the school of mankind, and they will learn in no other." The example of many thousands of benevolent and pious churchmen, has not hitherto directed the multitude to reverence the religious institutions of their country: the majority of the people are consequently becoming indifferent to their preservation. But this union of churchmen would take away this reproach, would turn the course of the public mind, and remove at once the effects of former example. Our government would be strengthened, our laws supported; our friends would be distinguished from our enemies; clergymen would cease to reproach each other, either with lukewarmness or enthusiasm; the association with dissenters for religious purposes, which has caused so much disunion in the Church, would no longer exist. Much additional revenue would accrue to the common funds set apart for the propagation of the Gospel; since many thousands, who now conscientiously withhold their as

+

sent to the popular societies, would contribute to the support of a chartered body, sanctioned by our Bishops, and rendered respectable by the virtues, talents, wealth, and loyalty of its adherents. We should be united at home, and possess greater influence abroad. All contending motives for future controversy on such subjects would be destroyed. The religious zeal, which extends its care to all mankind, would harmonise with that jealous attachment to our establishment, which induces so many of our clergy to regard with suspicion every novelty, whether useful or dangerous. Episcopacy would be strengthened, and our dangers lessened. Churchmen would once more consider themselves as brethren. The majority of the people, instead of separating themselves from the Establishment, would learn how to reconcile their known with their imaginary duties, acting at once as good subjects, sound churchmen, and true christians.

This then, my Christian brethren, this is the conduct we are called upon to imitate. This is the plan, and this alone, which reconciles our duties as churchmen, subjects, and Christians. Unite your respected names, your splendid talents, your ardent zeal, your princely liberality, in one grand oblation on the altar of your Church. "With singleness of eye" to the glory of God, be active in the promotion of union at home and the general welfare of mankind abroad. Proceed on the plan of the Apostles. Submit the influence of your power, your wealth, your rank, to the authority of your Church, and act in concert with your ecclesiasti cal superiors. Lay your offerings at the Apostles' feet. Proceed as an united body. Send out neither the Scripture nor the Missionary on your own authority. In the endeavour to please God, you will thus prove to the crowd who venerate and admire you, that you are the friends of your Church, not in appearance and profession, but in reality. Squander no more countless thousands in isolated ill-directed attempts to do good. Extend the Gospel on the apostolic plan, and by the close of another century mankind will have as much reason to bless our great and good country, for their deliverance from mental, as they have now reason to bless it for their deliverance from political slavery.

ON THE MEANS OF

BENEFITTING THE POOR.

It is generally acknowledged by those best acquainted with the subject, that the produce of our manufactures might be nearly doubled in a very short space of time. It is also admitted that the amount of agricultural produce might be greatly increased. Hence it will appear evident on reflection, that all the distress experienced at present must be wholly owing to want of management. For there is not the least doubt, but that as long as the territory can be made to produce a sufficient quantity of food, all the inhabitants of every country may be made to enjoy in abundance the comforts and conveniences, as well as the necessaries of life, provided. their energies are called forth and properly directed.

Considering the present state of society in this country, the only means by which this can be effected, or by which the poor can be either permanently or effectually benefitted, is by increasing the demand for labor. But the whole demand for labor can never exceed the amount of all the incomes in the state. It is principally therefore by increasing the amount of income, that the demand for labor can be increased; and in fact one species of income has been increased, and is proposed to be still farther increased, professedly for this purpose.

The effect it would produce in benefitting the poor by increas ing the demand for labor, was strongly insisted on by the advocates for the Corn Law. It was observed in debate, by the late Mr. Ponsonby, "That tradesmen ought not to begrudge the