form service. The mere mockery of College prayers now became clear to his mind, and without more ado he set himself the task of studying the subject completely, so as to discover upon what grounds the popular religious theories were erected. The task was bravely undertaken, and unflinchingly pursued, with results which will eventually become clear to the reader. Enough to say here, that he could not conscientiously enter the Church, and although warned by many older heads that he had better avoid plunging so deeply into theological enquiries, he pursued them for his pleasure long after his resolve not to take orders was published.

His course of study gradually widened, for, entering into the ancient histories, he endeavoured to discover the origin and trace the growth of the common religious ideas. All the standard works upon religious philosophy with which from time to time, and at great pains and cost to themselves, scholars have enriched the world, he studied with great care and profit, but in all he found the same want of generalisation from broad surveys, and the same foregone conclusions verbally repeated, without any attempt to furnish proof of their truth. In order the better to achieve his aim of learning what were the earliest modes of religious thought, he resolved upon studying the Sanscrit, so as to be able to read the Vedas and Puranas, and Hindu philosophical treatises for himself, and great was his astonishment at finding in them the same thoughts which he had long reverenced as purely Christian. From the Sanscrit storehouse he turned away to the Zend, in which again the same truths were set forth. The Avesta furnished him with ample evidence of the Hebrew captivity, for how else, he asked, could that people have been able to acquire and modify so much thought that belonged to the ancient Persians? Without contemplating the enormous amount of labour it involved, he resolved upon translating the whole mass of material, both Persian and Hindu, which he had examined, and had proceeded a great way in his task when his attention was directed to the study of the Egyptian tombs and papyri, in which he discovered far more of the Hebrew and Christian forms of thought than he had found in the former. This led him to travel, and when he quitted his University it was to visit Germany, for the purpose of conversing with Egyptologers before visiting the Nile, to read its sacred memorials for himself. When three years had been devoted to this work, although he had not exhausted the subject, he had accumulated such an amount of material as enabled him to speak positively about the origin of various Hebrew and Christian ideas, and to understand far better than he had previously done the theories of sacrifice and redemption. He returned to England a wiser but a sadder man. Filled with the idea that it would promote the cause of true religion if a candid history of the ancient religious ideas were produced, he set himself the task of composing it, and it must be confessed that if honesty of intention were the chief agent in producing it, he did not lack that desirable quality.

Hitherto his life had been quite isolated, and spent without much of real pleasure. A few years before the time at which he is introduced to the reader he was somewhat rash in his assertions and hopes; he was warm in maintaining that "only a little energetic and reasonable teaching could be needed in order to demonstrate to men the fallacies connected with their forms of religious thought, which," as he argued, "once exposed, would be rendered powerless." And when he was pressed with the argument that such energetic and reasonable teaching had already been supplied by many noble-hearted men, he managed to evade the logical conclusion by assuming

a defect either in the manner or matter of their teaching. His faith in the integrity of mankind was unbounded, as it should have been, but he failed to make those allowances for the power of prejudice which must be made by those who are to operate with that degree of success which their schemes of progress deserve. Time and experience had toned down the heat of his hopes, without operating to destroy his earnestness of purpose; he no longer believed in sudden changes, but was content to work and wait, being fully satisfied that in the end the truths he had adopted would be triumphant.

During the time he resided at Crosswood he had not made many enemies, for, although known as a man who entertained heterodox opinions, his wealth procured him the licence of toleration which was denied to his poorer neighbours. At that period he generally managed to introduce the topic which was uppermost in his mind, and as a rule he gave free utterance to his opinions. On one occasion, when dining at Rose Hall, and the subject of the last Sunday's sermon was under discussion, he declared that the preacher was fully justified, by both the Articles and the New Testament, in maintaining the doctrine of election.

This was rather fiercely contested by a gentleman at table, but Barrington carried the day, and showed himself to be perfectly master of the texts and commentaries. But when asked, did he believe in the theory, he repudiated it with all the scorn of which his nature was capable.

This seemed to many who heard him to be contradictory, and he was asked why he had so earnestly justified the preacher, although so determined in denouncing his doctrines.

His answer was characteristic. "Men," said he, "are to be tested rather by the honesty of their lives than by the completeness and purity of their doctrines. There are thousands who undertake to maintain that which is false, but they do so under the solemn conviction that their theories are worthy of all credit. The Mohametans are earnest in their faith, which is rendered clear by their honesty in trade, and they who denounce the creed must do justice to their morality of action, or little notice will be taken of their speeches. And in like manner, when dealing with the men of our own age and country, we must not confound error in belief with hardness of heart or wickedness of intention."

Such speeches were freely tolerated, but not so those of a political nature, in which he frequently indulged. He had once been pressed, by the Conservative party, to stand for a neighbouring borough, when his answer and expression of radical opinions was so sweeping that he alarmed the deputation which came to solicit him. Not that he belonged to the "radical party," or asked what they asked; his radicalism involved a return to those nobler principles of administration which shock alike the men of all parties, but which would secure to England both strength and moral progress.

Judging from the past, there was nothing in Crosswood to induce him to return; but he had done so under the impression that there he could enjoy that repose of mind which was necessary in order to enable him to complete his great book. The desire to accomplish that had become a strong passion, and many of his friends had been informed that before the close of the next winter the first volume would issue from the press. He little dreamt of the changes the events of this winter would make in his plans, or of the burden of care he was creating to constitute the load of his life. But while he is rearranging his extensive library, and preparing for his meditated labour, we must away to our long-neglected friend Mary, in Devonshire.

THE BRIGHTON ACCIDENT AND PROVIDENCE. "It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good," says the old saw, and experience serves to shew that the worst of evils are fraught with advantages to some class of Her Majesty's subjects. A murder, which fills a whole neighbourhood with horror, operates quite differently upon the hangman, whose annual income would be very small were no such crimes to be committed. And railway accidents form no exception to the general rule. They cause great commotion, and are the sources of unutterable sorrow, but the medical and other professional men step in to reap their harvest of fees from the field of disaster and death.

A recent railway accident, that of the Clayton tunnel, supplies us with an excellent illustration of this; for, not only the legal and medical gentlemen, but the members of the clerical profession are turning it to account to increase their authority and profits. Happening upon a Sunday, and especially to an excursion train, they have managed to discover in the sad catastrophe a proof of the Divine anger-an evidence that religion is not properly supported in the land. The clergy are placed in the awkward position of men who are benefited exactly in proportion to the fears of their neighbours. If they can identify their prosperity with the cause of God, then it will naturally follow that the people will the more readily contribute to their support. This fact holds out the temptation to them to see in things rather that which they wish, than what is; and is an inducement to bring God upon the stage, to play a part favourable to their worldly gains. Not that they are all conscious of this when holding forth upon Providential interferences, for, doubtless, many of them really believe what they teach. They are playing a selfish part, without knowing themselves to be mere actors; they are professing to possess a measure of knowledge, which a moment's unprejudiced thought would shew they do not possess; and their comparative blindness can only be accounted for upon the well-known principle, that men are apt to discover that meaning in events which suits their personal convenience, and harmonizes with their foregone conclusions.

We have been painfully impressed upon this point through reading the reports of the religious services at Brighton on the Sunday succeeding that of the catastrophe, which, for bad taste, bad logic, blasphemy, and presumption, cannot be surpassed.

Some of the preachers went so far as to inform their congregations that "God has borne witness in this catastrophe that He will not allow His "Sabbath to be violated." The collision is the result of Divine anger, and we are to view the whole array of dead and wounded as smitten by Him into their sad condition. Yet still these gentlemen have the unblushing effrontery to set forth that we are to believe in a God of justice and mercy. What blasphemy is this! Nothing more intensely revolting to all pure religious ideas can be conceived than lies in this statement. Does the Divine Being pursue the same course of injustice that is pursued by common untaught men? Is God a respecter of persons, and so much so that, while He allows the high and mighty to sin and go scot free, He selects the poor and miserable as the victims of His wrath? The passengers in that train were not the wickedest upon earth; some of them were little children, some were mere girls, and there were those of mature years which had been honourably spent. They were not bent upon the committal of crime, but only upon returning home, or visiting their friends. What was there in what they were doing which could justify their selection to bear the wrath of the Almighty One? In London, how

many of the high and mighty, the rich and learned, were busy at that time in doing deeds of wickedness which surpass, in their pernicious fruits, all that these sufferers could have conceived! The Bishops, who are as lights set upon the hill, are not celebrated for avoiding employing their servants on the Sundays. Their carriages are to be seen upon the public streets; and, if it be answered that it is a work of necessity when the hierarchs of our Church are conveyed in carriages upon the Sunday, we remind the speakers that Jesus was in the habit of walking, and that Paul did not keep his equipages of ease and luxury. And, besides these, how many of the aristocratic body there are who give dinners, and employ servants to be at their call, upon the "Lord's "day." Are we to say that God visits the poor with his judgments for seeking pleasure upon Sunday, but permits the rich and powerful to escape? The hired priest will say so, but we have learnt better things than to accept that theory, and, moreover, we know why he undertakes to speak so unjustly.

Ours is a busy age, and each profession has its times and trials. Sunday is the priestly trading day. The divinity shops are then opened, and, in order to prevent the business from being turned into other channels, the traders unanimously protest against other men enjoying liberty to pursue their calling. They ask that all who are not priests shall be prohibited from turning an honest penny upon that day. What is it to them that a man has been employed all through the week in an unhealthy atmosphere, in a confined shop, and needs the country air to invigorate his frame? They have nothing to do with his body, but much with his soul, and his purse. If he empties the latter into "the treasury of the Lord," which is but another name for "the pocket of the priest," then all will be well, even should he die through the confinement. They have neither mercy nor tenderness, but, with an evident violation of common decency, they deal out damnation unto all who decline submitting to such dictation. Were we to name the peculiar pleasures hoped for in the future by these men, we should not hesitate to say that their desire will be to inflict punishment upon the unfortunates who were compelled to fly in terror from their wretched discourses. Men of the Clay, Cumming, and Spurgeon school would find it to be a perfect heaven if they were employed to heat fire seven times hotter in order to punish Sabbath breakers. Fortunately for mankind the future lies in the hands of the Divine; it is not in the power of the priests. They are hard enough upon earth, where their power is limited; what they would be in some other sphere, where their power would be increased, it is painful even to contemplate. But their day of despotism has passed away, and we can discover no reason why the overturned system of protection should be extended to the parsons now that even farmers are able to live without it.

It strikes us as somewhat contradictory, that while, upon the one hand, a body of men declare that the catastrophe was a mark of Divine anger, a direct visitation of Providence; upon the other, we have men who are calculating the amount to be paid by the railway company in the shape of damages. They who believe that God was the direct cause, who maintain that it was His punishment upon the guilty, must admit that the train having started no human power could have prevented the work of ruin. The juries that shortly will be called upon to decide upon the amount of compensation will be guided by their notions of how far the company is to be held responsible for neglecting to make proper provision for the due passage of the trains. They will not discuss the question whether trains should or should not run upon the Sunday. They start with the assumption that such trains may be run

upon that day. All which they require to have proved, is that proper precautions to prevent a collision were not taken. Thus the question is removed out of the theological and brought into the business sphere. But, evidently, if God, by His special action, caused the collision, no human power could have prevented it, and the company are no longer responsible. It would be an act of fraud to make the directors pay, if the loss of life were not caused by their bad management, or by that of their servants. We believe that they should be mulcted in very heavy damages, and simply because of our conviction that the loss of life had nothing whatever to do with Sunday travelling, but resulted from bad railway arrangements; that if the trains had not been started so closely after each other, or if the distance signals had worked well, no such collision would have occurred. But they who hold by the theory that the fearful loss of life followed from "the determinate counsel and operations of an offended God," are debarred from suing for a single penny, and have no right to cast blame upon the company.

Probably some of the Jesuits of our Churches will argue, as they are in the habit of doing in other cases, that, "although God had decided upon the "catastrophe, the human agents were quite as culpable as if they had been "the sole cause." This happy discovery of double responsibility is spoken of by many as "furnishing a proud proof of the searching enquiry that "has been conducted by the master minds into the minuter details of "God's moral goverment," but unto us it is only a signal instance of how human folly exhibits itself, in dealing with words as though they had no meaning. We cannot comprehend God, but shall be justified in assuming Him to be strong enough to take the responsibility of His own actions. That which He determines to do will be done without any other than human mechanical assistance. The English law wisely concludes that a wife is not responsible for actions done under the control of her husband; for, recognising the fact that the stronger will is sure of the mastery, it views the woman rather as a victim than a criminal. And so in like manner when we contemplate the so-called Providences. They have not two factors. The higher will must control, and thus release the lesser from all responsibility. And if we attempt to punish men for performing actions which God compelled them to perform, we shall be as unjust as if we were to punish a child for breaking a window, although it were proved that its father raised and directed its little arm when dealing the destructive blow.

But, in fact, the whole theory of Special Providences is based upon the fallacy of assuming ourselves to be wise when we are ignorant. He who sees anything done which he cannot explain, rushes to the conclusion that it was miraculous-that is to say, he concludes, first, that by no natural means could it have been done, and, second, that it was God who did it. We object to such abuse of language, because its presumption is most offensive. Who is there now living that has sufficiently mastered the forces of nature, so as to be able to say to what extent their operation can be carried? and who is there to take, without arrogance, the next step, and say that the Divine has specially operated? When we know not how a certain work has been performed it is wisest to admit our ignorance. And when, as in this instance, we know that there were sufficient forces in action to account for the effect produced, it is most scandalous to assume the operation of other causes; and absolutely blasphemous when the "Will of God" is imported into the

matter.

P. W. P.