unsettled question among free inquirers. What I mean is, that to practice and promote discussion on all sides, nowhere seems to have assumed the character of a duty. My attention was first drawn to the fact by the conduct of the Weekly Tribune, a newspaper which existed at the time that The Leader was set up. The editors of the Tribune, though disciples of Robert Owen, denounced The Leader, because it had in it articles written by clergy inen. The Leader was a journal of free discussion of all opinions; and whatever newspaper assumed to represent the humanity of England, must represent the religion of England also. But because the religious opinions advocated in The Leader, seemed erroneous in the Tribune, objections were made to their publication. It was plain to me, that the Tribune saw no value in discussional publicity, unless upon its own side. About the same time I had occasion to apply to a German friend, whose opinions were of the rationalistic cast, to translate for me M. Heinzen's Letters on Atheism, written, I believe, in reply to Chevalier Bunsen. He agreed to do so for my private perusal, but not for publication, as he 'could not, in conscience, help to disseminate views he believed to be pernicious.' I was astonished; we, who never feared any man's opinions, found our own friend regarding, with a Christian dread, the opinions of others."-Why do the Clergy avoid Discussion? p. 36.

This is a sad exposure of the Freethinking school, who, according to this spirit, would gag the press if they had civil power and destroy liberty of thought, just as they slew and banished priests in the Atheistic outburst of the French revolution; and from the urgency with which governments are called upon in the "Task of To-day," to entertain the new regeneration and join the crusade against Christianity, it is plain, these men, like Romanists, demand toleration and freedom when they are in the minority, but will not allow it when they become the majority. This feature we may take occasion yet to develope in a particular examination of the threats and entreaties addressed to the present ruling powers. It is enough now to answer a common argument of Secularists, that persecution does not belong to Rome exclusively, but is a part of Christianity, because every Christian, feeling his principles to be so important, is bound on principle to persecute others into salvation. We shall not stay to point out the many weak assumptions in this argument, but apply it to the Freethinkers themselves:-if their opinions are of no consequence, they need not advocate them; but if they are of consequence, they also, on this method of reasoning, are proportionately bound to carry them by fire and sword, and to exterminate Christian heresy: especially since there are no antagonist principles in their system to oppose this procedure; for they avow utility as their basis, and declare, that Christianity obstructs social and political progress, therefore, on these grounds, they may employ political power or revolutionary authority, mob law, to exterminate Christianity, and secure the safety of the people, which is the highest law and reason, against that religion which they mildly declare to be an obstruction to all improvement and the "mother of hyprocrisy and malignity."-Cabinet of Reason, vol. i.

Thus we are told, "if the present rulers cannot take an active part in

the progress of the nation, they cannot much longer retain their position."-p. 135. Thus have they made large contributions to Machiavellian politics, and put the keystone to the arch of the science of spiritual and political tyranny.

But, at least, we may expect, that the leader who stands alone in the improved freedom of thought and discussion, whose proof of our persecution from the importance of our principles; and whose condemnation of Freethinkers, for objecting to clerical contributions to a free Leader newspaper, we have already noticed;-we may expect such a writer to be free from this form of narrowness, and that he will freely allow the introduction of Christian literature even into Freethinking reading-rooms.

No such thing: at least, if we may credit one Mr. Jones, of whom this writer says, "publicly and privately, I have always said, that his name was the hope of his party; and my private regard has not contradicted my public words."-Reasoner, vol. ix, No: 17. Now this same Mr. Lloyd Jones, who is highly eulogized in the article above quoted, addresses the writer of that article, and accuses him of complaining that Christian papers had been introduced into Freethought reading-rooms. Now, if this be true, and the fact is notorious, it follows, that all Freethinkers are bigotted except the leader in question, and that he is just the same as his companions. The letter of Mr. Lloyd Jones may speak for itself. No. 20, vol. x, Reasoner, page 331 :

"SIR,-In your paper for January 15th, yon take some trouble to prove to your readers that I am not what you consider a consistent man.

"I dare say I have much to answer for on that head; I should be sorry to look upon myself as infallible, either in doctrine or practice: I may, however, be allowed a word of explanation in relation to the charges you have brought against me.

"You say that I, at the Congress of the Social Reform League, assisted to carry the following resolution:-'That this society ESCHEW THE IDENTIFICATION of Social Reform with any peculiar theological creed or speculations, such identification being calculated to commit all who accept the economical, educational, and practical doctrines of Socialism to theological or speculative opinions which they may not hold, and tending, in the existing state of public opinion upon such subjects, materially to retard the acceptance of the practical views of Socialism by society.'

"You then go on to say that notwithstanding this pledge of neutrality, the Christian Socialist, which is not satisfactory to you, and which, as you state, abounds in proselytising articles, is allowed to lie on the counter of the Charlotte-street Store, of which I am the manager.

"To both these charges, with such qualifications as I shall indicate, I plead guilty. I admit I supported the resolution quoted, and for the following reasons:

"Previous to the assembling of the Congress alluded to, many simpleminded people thought, that, as the late revolutions on the continent of Europe had brought the economics of Socialism under the notice of great numbers in this country, that a good opportunity offered for a junction of all who called themselves Socialists, for the purpose of urging (if I may

use the expression) the secular parts of the system upon the attention of the public. I was one who looked at the matter in this light, because Socialism was always with me a primary question. I never had any pet. philosophical or theological crochet of my own that I nursed at its expense; I never regarded it as the question which above all others, required to be settled, and I always endeavoured to work in the best way I could for such settlement.

"In this spirit the neutral ground offered by the revolution was accepted and occupied by me as long as it was tenable. I appeal to the members of the Committee who were appointed to watch over that movement, and ask them if I did not do my duty in good faith as long as there was the least chance of carrying it on? And I also ask them if you, and the other celebrities, members of the Congress, did not, as soon as the Congress broke up, go home, leaving the neutral ground unoccupied, and allowing poor Socialism to shift for itself? Surely, sir, you could not seriously think of fastening me down to a barren neutrality which was totally disregarded by yourself! I am not going to condemn you for this-it would be presumption in me to do so: I am only a mortal, you are a God. I know I must be content with criticism and rebuke-to you belong adoration and incense. I only ask that you may look with a pitying eye and a forgiving heart on one who, being but a man, and living in a world where there is much work to be done, and much sin to be avoided, cannot afford always to keep his eyes upon himself. The Gods only, by being continually the subjects of their own contemplation, can keep themselves in a state of entire and complete consistency.

"The second part of your censure is easily disposed of. The proprietor and editor of the Christian Socialist offered a portion of his space to the 'Society for Promoting Working Men's Association.' The offer was accepted, and that journal contains, every week, a history of the co-operative movement. The Store is part of that movement, and therefore the paper is sold at the Store, as well as at all the Working Men's Association. I think this reason will satisfy a mere mortal-you can best tell whether or not it will be satisfactory to a God.

The proselytising articles you speak of I have not seen. I do not believe they are there, in any bad sense. Whether they are or not, I have nothing to do with them; I am not asked to read them, much less to believe them. I am strongly inclined to think they are like the halls which you so liberally advise your followers to throw open-they exist only in your imagination.

"I have no more to say. I have, I hope, admitted your greatness and my own littleness with sufficient frankness. All that I now ask is, permission to do my work in my own way; I have no desire to meddle with Groping for logical nothings in a philosophical puddle is not in my line; refined abstractions were always above my reach. LLYOD JONES.

yours.

"P.S.-You say you told me, that the resolution for a neutral ground 'would never be carried out.' If you did so, pray why do you, on the same page, ask those whom you call Christian Socialists to 'let Socialism be the neutral ground on which all men can work for the common good?' I suppose the want of sleep you complain of at the commencement of your article caused you to nod-divinities do so sometimes. "L. J."

Reviews and Criticisms.

"Quo Warranto." London: B. L. Green.

THIS is the title of a periodical that started last October, we do not know whether it is continuing, but judging from the first number, the title is a sufficient objection to the work we see no warrant for it; its principles are warranted by assumption, it commits the fault that has marred all reformation and progress-the extravagances of professed friends. We should advise the Editor to style it in future THE GRUMBLER, or, if he likes GROWLER better, the word will suit the work, and we wish his ability engaged in a more useful undertaking than opposing the word reverend, by the aid of an anti-tittle club.

The Scripture Warrant; or, Congregationalism and its Reformers. By the Rev. ANDREW REED, B.A. London: Ward and Co.

THIS little volume is a useful digest of Church polity, being a defence of the ministry against the doctrine of speaking brethren, which is now a favourite with those who having learned all they know from settled pastors, seek to unsettle them, instead of going and creating new Churches on their own model where they can speak to their own satisfaction, and, if not to the satisfaction of others, at least to their satiety.

Mr. Reed's book is characterised by his own kindliness of spirit, whilst it abounds in forcible statements of Scriptural and common sense principles. The "Quo Warranto" brethren, who called a meeting in Norwich whilst the ministers were at Bradford, will here find their resolutions fully stated and clearly refuted, which is the best prescription for an epidemic of that sort; we recommend it, both as a cure and a remedy.

Answer to G. J. Holyoake's “ Logic of Death; or, why should the Atheist fear to die?" Dundee James Duff.

THERE have been many excellent replies to the "Logic of Death;" but this one printed by James Duff, Dundee, strikes us as quite equal if not superior to any we have seen, we are sorry to learn, that they are not properly in the publishing market, having been sold rather privately and locally than through the more general channels.

We hope the author (the Rev. James Forsyth, Quoad Sacra Minister, Lochee, by. Dundee,) will consign them to some London house: as they well deserve public attention.

A Letter to Samuel Cozens" on the Divine Decrees," (being Strictures on a Sermon.) By PHILIP PUGH, Primitive Methodist Minister. London: Thomas Holliday, Conference Offices.

THIS letter is worthy the earnest attention of those troubled with these deep speculations it contains some very enlightened views of Scripture, and will remove many popular misapprehensions, founded on quoting Scripture without looking at the context, a plan very common with the Infidels and High Calvinists: whatever view the reader may take of the complicated questions, he may find some advantage in the common-sense explanations of this letter.

Twenty Plain Sermons, on the principal Doctrines of the Gospel. By JOHN PETTY. London: Holliday, Conference Offices.

THIS is another Primitive Methodist contribution to Christian literature. We have examined some of these sermons, and find them, though "plain," above the average; they will be very useful for instructive devotional reading.

The Case of the Manchester Educationists. A Review of the Evidence taken before a Committee of the House of Commons. By JOHN HOWARD HINTON, M.A. THIS is a very important two-shilling pamphlet, the name of the author is a sufficient recommendation: we advise both Secularists and Voluntaries to read this evidence with fairness: the question is one that will soon occupy public attention.

Trevelyan on the Insanity of Mankind. London: H. Bailliere.

If any are in doubt as to the materialistic and fatalising tendency of phrenology legitimately carried out, this pamphlet may convince them: if it be widely read, it will only prove that this so-called science belies all the moral elements of our nature.

The argument of the pamphlet is, that as sanity results from a perfect brain and nobody has one, therefore, mankind are insane, whilst some are extra-insane. The fatality of this theory is no compliment to the author, for we have no measurement of his bust, and, therefore, do not know whether his insanity is extra: consequently, his reasoning is very suspicious: whereas if his conclusion is correct about mankind, it will include himself: it is the misfortune of our critical organization, to see in the failure of Mr. Trevelyan's argument, a proof of his conclusion so far as the author is concerned.

The Religion for Mankind; or, Christianity adapted to Man.
SPENCE, M.A.

By JAMES

We must defer our notice of this work till our next number, simply premising in its favour, that our leading article of last month was a lecture delivered by the same gentleman.

The Teacher's Offering, for 1852. London: Ward and Co.

THIS volume is very neatly got up, and suitable as a present to youths; it contains much useful information conveyed in an interesting style: Sabbath School teachers would do well to introduce this monthly to their scholars.

Wellington and Victory; or, Christians more than Conquerors. By the Rev. A. MORTON BROWN, LL.D., Cheltenham. London: John Snow.

THE object of this discourse is to elevate spiritual over physical warfare; shewing that soldiers are praised by men, as conquerors, but the successful combatant against sin, is declared by God to be more than conqueror. This design is well-executed and the Discourse is calculated to incite us to fight the good fight of faith.

Wellington and War. By the Rev. NEWMAN HALL, B.A. London: Snow.

MR. HALL points out the dangers of war in the permanent evils of taxation, the drain upon a nation's industry, as a questionable price of glory: whilst the valuable qualities of the iron Duke are not ignored, the author aims to prevent the admiration due to the personal qualities of the Duke, being transferred to the profession of arms; and to enlist popular sympathy in the more useful course of peace and commerce and the moral bravery of personal holiness.

Both these pamphlets on Wellington may be read with great advantage by our young men, and are well adapted to the present times.