appeal would have been made for this mode of affording pastoral aid, recommended as it was by every authority which the church of England recognises, and ample as was the machinery for any extent of operations: but no; under the sanction of two or three bishops, the Pastoral Aid Society went on; and not content, as they ought to have been, with confining their operations for collecting and distributing money within those dioceses the bishops of which approve of the plan, they even hold their principal meetings in the diocese of London, and are headed, I am sorry to say, by clergy of that diocese, who have stepped out of their place as parish priests, not to rally round their bishop, and give a helping hand to his endeavours to supply the needs of the church, but to make long speeches in defence of a system of which he, their diocesan, the primate, and the large majority of England's spiritual overseers disapprove. Now what is the excuse for the continuance of the Pastoral Aid Society? The upholders of the Missionary Society may think themselves bound to attempt missions in Africa and elsewhere; and, seeing no other mode of accomplishing this at present, may think themselves justified in doing this on other than church principles; one can understand this, but I am wholly ǎropos to divine the reasons which a clergyman can give to himself for keeping up the unkindly feelings excited among his brethren by the rivalry between two societies having identically the same object in view. The member of the Pastoral Aid Society cannot say that there is no other, at least, equally efficient way of accomplishing the desired object; but does he think it his duty to subscribe to such a society only as shall extend evangelical truth by taking care that all its agents shall hold certain theological principles? Your correspondent would take away even this reason, bad as it is. The observations, however, which you, Sir, have made upon this point in the "Notices to Correspondents" of this month, (May,) would lead one to believe that "T. S." has expressed rather, perhaps, what his own wishes may be, than the actual matter of fact; and if a story which I have heard currently reported, upon very good authority, be true, it will appear that the veto reserved to itself by the society upon the choice of an incumbent who accepts their money is not a dead letter. It is said that a curate, selected by a reverend doctor, an incumbent of the diocese of London, has been actually rejected by the Pastoral Aid Society, by whom the doctor had been promised help, although the bishop of London, so far from disapproving the employment of this clergyman as curate of the place in question, had, I believe, approved of the incumbent's choice of him. But, again, is it thought a duty to uphold the system of having paid lay agents in the church? It may be; but if this is not to do something very like what I made my "Naval Aid Society" do, I confess I do not know what is. But to take your correspondent's own view as to what the constitution of such a society ought to be-the ships are ready for sea; men only are wanting, or rather the means to supply them. The Naval Aid Society says, "We will raise money for you, but it shall not be raised exclusively for sailors; we will provide also for the support of marines." To this offer the Admiralty replies that they gladly close with it, and will take

the society under their patronage-only that, before they can do this, the society must give up the marines, for that they object to their employment: but no; the society has the sanction of a few admirals and post-captains, and that is sufficient; money must be raised for marines. The admiralty, therefore, constitute another society, of which the sovereign is patron, and to which every admiral in the service belongs-even those who approve of the marines. Now I do believe that in that service, where necessary discipline is understood, every officer, whatever his private opinions might be, would leave the "Naval Aid Society," and devote all his energies to increase the fund opened by the Admiralty, as the most likely way of attaining the object in view, and the most creditable to the service: individually he might expect to be a more useful person were he the secretary or a leading member of an original and independent society; but his patriotism would tell him that, at such a juncture, and for such a purpose, naval officers should be united as one man; and his good sense, as well as his habits of discipline, would convince him that this unity of action would only be attained by the inferiors yielding to their superiors, and, among equals, the minority to the majority. But really will clergymen say that they are determined to uphold a system objected to by the primates of both England and Ireland, (for the Irish Additional Curates Society has rejected it,) and also by all but three or four bishops of both those churches?

Your correspondent, at least, cannot, for he entirely agrees with me on the main subject of my letter, and he rejoices "in any observations calculated to enforce the Christian duties of unity, and order, and obedience." The principles of obedience would suggest the propriety of not pursuing a mode of affording pastoral aid to the church of England objected to by the primate and bishops of that church; and the principles of unity would suggest the advantages of adopting but one mode for the attainment of that end; while the principles of order would further suggest the plain common-sense rule, that that one mode should be the one recommended by the primates, and sanctioned by all the bishops of England and Ireland.

I have dwelt rather longer than necessary, perhaps, on the letter of "T.S.," but I wished to clear myself of the charge of "misrepresentation." With regard to certain observations made and questions asked, are they not somewhat trivial? "A Subscriber to the Four Societies' asks me to state in what manner the original charter preserves the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel from the "miserable quarrels" which disturb the peace of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge: I answer, by excluding the system of universal suffrage. With regard to his other question, I do not know that I have any meaning to explain as to the use of the term "incorporated," as applied to the Propagation Society in contradistinction to the others mentioned. I did not certainly mean that two of the others were not incorporated; it was an awkward way of expressing myself, and I stand corrected. Your correspondent "S. I. E." says, that "wherever a bishop asserts and maintains his undoubted rights, the constitution of the Missionary" Society cannot, and will

not, interfere with its operations:" he must mean the practice does not; for in the constitution the episcopal office is not once recognised; and even in the practice, the last charge of the bishop of Calcutta, had it been all printed, added to what we know has happened in the West Indies, would have shewn how difficult and painful a task they sometimes make it for a bishop to "assert and maintain his undoubted rights." Would that we could see that society lay all its wealth and zeal at the feet of our living apostles, and learn to trust more to the ordinances of God, and less to the contrivances of man! And would that those spiritual overseers may see of what form should be the missions of the church of England!—not a few poor, wandering, solitary priests, but for each mission a bishop with his priests and attendant deacons : so was the world evangelized at the first ; and while the church is to be the converter of the heathen, no otherwise will the banner of the cross be planted permanently among them.

Before concluding, I must say a few words on another letter in the same number, "On the Application of Money given at the Celebration of the Holy Communion." I feel much gratified by the observations which "J. H." has there made upon my former letter, and perhaps it may be also a satisfaction to him to know that the connexion between the principles I there laid down and the mode of collecting money for charitable purposes, which he proposes, is a real connexion, at least it has been so in my mind; for, being desirous of carrying out my own principles into practice, I formed last year, upon taking possession of my present cure, a scheme for a weekly parochial collection. Although I have not yet put it into practice, owing to my church being in the course of rebuilding, I will nevertheless, with your permission, mention what it is, and perhaps, through the assistance of "J. H." and some of your other correspondents, we may form a system capable of general adoption. My very small congregation being all composed of poor people, I proposed to select only four objects, and to assign to each of those objects a quarter of the year, during which period the people should be from time to time, as discretion might direct, reminded of the claims of the particular object proposed for their charity, the means of exercising which I propose to afford them every Sunday, following the apostolic regulation karà μíav σaßßárwv, which injunction should be constantly urged upon them; for it seems a desirable thing that our people, both rich and poor, should acquire a permanent habit of laying by something every week, as the Lord may prosper each, and that this should be made as an offering at the altar "upon the first day of the week." I had proposed to make this collection generally through the whole congregation, during the reading of the sentences in the offertory, making an offering of the "alms" so collected in the prayer for the church militant, which ought always to precede the blessing; a short psalm or hymn after the sermon gives time to the clergyman to resume his surplice and place at the altar. This primitive custom has never been dropped in the diocese of Sodor and Man, and it is a gratifying sight every Sunday, or at furthest every other Sunday, to see the poor Manx throwing their pennies into the church's treasury, which their priest offers for them at their

humble altar; it is true that this collection is there made only for the sick and needy of the parish, but the principle is capable of the most extended application. Although I had not intended to confine my collection to communicants only, I yet quite see the feeling with which "J. H." proposes to do so, and it is worthy of the most serious consideration. At the end of every year I intend to forward the amount collected for each fund to the bishop, as the contribution of those whom he committed to my charge, towards the necessities of the church and the poorer brethren. By such a course I think that all will be done according to apostolic order, and the rules of the church of England; the process is very simple, as are all the church's regulations, but it also presents to us "a machinery," as your correspondent well observes, "and that of divine origin, established in every corner of our land, which, if brought into full operation, would abundantly meet the demands now made on the church." It may be an encouragement to others to know, that although this scheme has not been actually put into operation in this place, yet at the very first proposition of it I received a promise from my squire's son that he would double any amount I might thus collect in each year. The subject of my former letter is more perhaps for the consideration of the heads of the church; but the latter part of this, and that of "J. H.," is directly addressed to the parochial clergy; I unite therefore with him in earnestly calling the attention of our brethren to this point. I am, reverend Sir, yours very faithfully, W.

ON EXTEMPORARY ADDRESSES.

SIR,-May I be permitted to offer a few remarks upon an article in your last number, headed "Extemporary Addresses." The circumstances which called forth that article are simply these :-At the interment of a labourer on the railroad, the minister of the parish in which he died (and to whose charge, be it remembered, he with his fellow labourers were pro tempore committed by the discipline of our church) thought it expedient to improve the occurrence by exhorting the assembled multitude to "refrain from drunkenness and sabbath-breaking," the sins to which persons of this class are most addicted. The address, it seems, was delivered "in the open air," and this it is that has called forth the strictures of your correspondent.

Far be it from me to reply to these strictures in a spirit of controversy, much less of unkindness; yet I cannot but express my apprehension, that by thus cavilling at what are at best but the non-essentials of religion, occasion is too frequently given to the great enemy of souls to draw aside men's minds from the vital points of repentance towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. In comparison with these all else is but a grand impertinence, and I know not how a Christian minister, who is bound by the very tenour of his office "to seek for Christ's sheep that are dispersed abroad, and for his children who are in the midst of this naughty world, that they may be saved through Christ for ever," can conscientiously acquit himself of this obligation unless he feels at liberty to adapt himself to the various circumstances and opportunities

of ministerial usefulness as they continually present themselves. It seems that, in the case before us, both the time and place presented difficulties in the way of any other mode of address than the one which has excited the anger of your correspondent. If I am not mistaken, the funeral took place after divine service, and when there had already been a sermon from the pulpit. Besides, it might be well concluded by all who know anything of the habits of this unhappy class of men, that they would not be induced to listen to a regular pulpit address, neither would they enter the church for that purpose; which, moreover, would not have been large enough to contain them had they attempted it. It was necessary, if possible, to arrest their attention; and what other mode would be so likely to effect this purpose as that of delivering an address to them from the grave of their departed companion, and telling them that the exhortations they were then hearing "would doubtless be the admonition of the deceased were he permitted to return among them." I confess I see no more "irregularity" in an address of this kind than our reformers would in preaching to the assembled multitudes at Paul's Cross; and I really must take leave to remark, that, until such conduct is disapproved of by the bishop of the diocese, I cannot but deem any other interference, and especially an anonymous one, as tending to a greater breach of church discipline than the very "irregularity" it presumes to censure. I will not remark upon the last sentences in your correspondent's letter any further than to say that they have recalled to my mind the words of one of our holy* bishops, long since entered into his rest :"Now by the dear bonds of Christian brotherhood; by our love to our common mother the church; by our holy care and zeal of the prosperous success of the gospel of our Lord Jesus; let us all compose our hearts to peace, and rest ourselves in those common truths which sober minds shall find abundantly sufficient, either for our knowledge or salvation." Happy, indeed, would it be for the church of Christ if those who stand together upon the same platform of religious faith and discipline would cease to view each other with eyes of mutual depreciation and prejudice, as enrolled under different banners, but regard each other as marshalled under the banner of their common Saviour, and as united together by the endearing cement of Christian love. That this may shortly be the case is the sincere wish and prayer of, Mr. Editor, your obedient servant, G. W. R.+

Bishop Hall.

[The Editor does not know whether this letter is written by anybody at all concerned in the business, but he inserts it in the hope that it may promote the discussion of a subject on which there seems to be a great difference of opinion. He is sorry that after the disavowal of a spirit of controversy and unkindness, the writer should talk about anonymous interference presuming to censure in such a way as to become a breach of discipline, unless indeed he refers to the newspaper from which the paragraph was extracted. But why should he adopt such a mode of remark if he is prepared fairly and openly (anonymously, as in the present case, if he pleases) to maintain the two points on which he seems to rest, and which are pretty broadly laid down in his letter. First, that a minister cannot conscientiously acquit himself of his obligations unless he feels at liberty to adapt himself to the various circumstances and opportunities of ministerial usefulness as they continually present themselves, he being the sole judge in the matter, and having a right to do what he thinks