country, where the will of the sovereign can instantly and effectually interpose, and where all dignity and influence centre in his person, greater latitude may perhaps be admitted without detriment.

These several conclusions can only be impugned by arguments which suppose either that the interests of policy are altogether independent of religion, or that the religious establishment of a country is not founded upon the orthodox principles of Scripture. But as the state in providing an establishment substantially denies the first of these propositions, and in fixing its particular doctrines virtually contradicts the other, it is undoubtedly bound to use every legitimate effort to secure the religious instruction of the people in the established tenets. If it be evident that a political establishment cannot endure in a free country unless the habitual opinions of the people are directed in a current favourable to its objects and principles, it is doubly so that, in a case so exclusively within the province of mind as religious instruction, an establishment formed for that purpose must fall to the ground, unless it possess the means of obtaining a permanent influence over public opinion. The duty of the statesman therefore, (and under that denomination I include every individual of influence in the state,) does not admit either of doubt or dispute. But his success will, after all, be contingent. If the establishment he supports be really founded in the pure doctrines of the Gospel, and has been duly and zealously set forth to the people in all its purity, it will doubtless secure their hearts against the inroads of all opponents. But if both, or either of these conditions be wanting, the spiritual arms, which can alone be fairly used in its defence will not be found of temper to

withstand a vigorous attack, and the illegitimate weapons of persecution will be too often called in aid. It is superfluous to refer to the respective practice of the Roman Catholic and Protestant establishments in illustration of this remark. A few observations however may be profitably made upon the means of restoring the influence of a pure and orthodox established religion, from which the minds of the people have been partially alienated.

It is evident that this result can only have arisen, in the first instance, from the gradual debasement of religious sentiment in the educated part of the community, the influence of whose opinions and example will always extend sooner or later throughout the whole community. The religious establishment, consisting as it does of human agents, can scarcely altogether avoid the contagion. The spirit of the times, whatever it may be, will more or less affect it, and the tone of its doctrine and the strictness of its practice will be insensibly lowered, without shockthe feelings of the people, or being very clearly perceived by the establishment itself. The instructors of free agents are almost imperceptibly guided by the turn of mind which they perceive to be prevalent among their pupils. They have a natural, and in some respects a laudable apprehension of closing the minds of their hearers, against all improvement by shocking their prejudices and running counter to their preconceived opinions.

It is probable that causes of this description operated in lowering the scriptural and orthodox spirit of most of the Protestant churches of Europe during the last century. The rise and progress of modern philosophy and liberality, which were only cant

terms for atheism and deism, insensibly corrupted the sound and vigorous principles in which the Protestant laity of Europe were educated for more than a century subsequent to the reformation. The taint of the poison was transmitted to their posterity, and seemed habitually fixed in the constitution of many of the higher ranks of society. They could not bear with patience the humbling truths of the Gospel, and it is natural to conclude, from the causes just stated, that those truths were in consequence less frequently promulgated; and most certain it is, that scarcely any desire was exhibited, either by the state or by individuals, for affording the people augmented means of instruction in the tenets of the establishment in proportion to the evident necessity created by their increasing number. But as every departure from established principle necessarily leads in time to a reaction, especially where freedom of discussion is permitted, active and inquiring minds were led by the obvious symptoms of degeneracy to compare the doctrines, the sentiments, and the characters of modern times with those which are associated with our dearest recollections in the history of the Protestant Church. It was then that the benefit of Establishments shone forth in all its lustre. The reaction, it must be confessed, far exceeded the original impulse of the force impressed, and was not a little tinctured with enthusiasm and extravagance. But it served to rouse the energies and restore the elasticity of the body of the orthodox church; and her fixed and permanent principles afforded an unerring rule by which to judge of the extent to which a salutary re-action might fairly be carried. But as the meducated part of mankind are prone to extremes,

it is not surprising that many would not consent to stop at this point, but have left far behind them the good old principles of their forefathers, who bled for that liberty of conscience which their posterity appear somewhat prone to convert into licentiousness.

Now if this be any thing like a just account of the origin of many of the modern sects, it will be more easy to discover the proper remedy than effectually to apply it. It may, however, be generally comprised in one short sentence: viz. a return to the good old principles, a deviation from which was the original cause of the evil, and a fervent but charitable zeal both in providing and profiting by the necessary means of imparting the knowledge of those principles in their true and genuine spirit to the great body of the people.

This remedy, I am happy to believe, is in rapid progress, and that its effects will daily become more visible in the augmented virtue and happiness of mankind. I shall not again repeat the arguments of this treatise, which prove that the elements of human society can securely rest upon no other basis; but it is impossible not to feel a sentiment of gratitude at the share which our own country has been permitted to bear in enlarging and strengthening it. Nor do I believe that any of my rational countrymen are so exclusively English as to suffer the alloy of a baser sentiment to mix with their genuine feelings of congratulation, that foreign governments are also raising a superstructure of public happiness and prosperity upon similar principles. The following treaty is a most noble and singular testimony to this fact. I have heard that some politicians, unable to appre

ciate the genuine feeling and singleness of mind which dictated its contents,

"Advancing gravely to apply

To th' optic glass their judging eye,
Have bent their penetrating brow

As if they meant to gaze it through,"

and have discovered a meditated attack upon the grand Turk or an holy crusade against the Wahabis. But a candid consideration will convince us, that a document scarcely ever appeared containing stronger internal evidence of unity in object and artlessness in design; or, (if the circumstances under which it was drawn up be considered,) reflecting greater honour on the heads and hearts of the potentates personally concerned in its composition.

The sighs and groans of their own subjects, and the retributive sufferings of the French, had been heard and contemplated by them as the ultimate results of a long course of political transactions disjoined "from those true principles on which the wisdom of God in his Revelation has founded the tranquillity and prosperity of nations." The effects were before their eyes, the causes were not doubtful, and but one effectual remedy presented itself.

The sovereigns had the moral magnanimity boldly to avow their determination to apply it. This term is peculiarly apposite on the present occasion; for it was plain to foresee that the document would be branded as little better than cant and hypocrisy, and the framers of it as little better than madmen, by those philosophers who, in their admiration of religion without cant, are themselves a little apt to adopt what I have seen well described by the term of cant