he who crouches for a moment in the awful presence of his fellow-mortal, is frequently ready to caricature the intruder, perhaps curse him, on his departure. A Unitarian missionary to succeed among the operative orders, must ascertain the extent of their mental culture, their modes of thinking, that he may find the surest way to their understandings and affections. He must cultivate the useful rather than the ornamental style of composition, even at the risk of being underrated for talents or learning. Nor must he, in seeking to make known the glad tidings of the Saviour, as contradistinguished from the sad tidings of modern divines, fail to expose those irrational, though stereotyped interpretations of particular passages of Scriptnre, which, from the pulpit, in the sabbath school, and at the fireside, are employed to prop up the notions of a tripartite distinction in the Divine Unity, purchased salvation, and proxy righteousness. Discourses designed to prove the accordance of our views with the general tenor of Holy Writ, and with sound philosophy, though indispensable, are not all that is wanted to persuade ordinary minds. As regards the less educated, so long as there is any number of isolated texts, which seem to yield a shadow of support to the views they have been accustomed to account orthodox, it is hardly to be expected that they will embrace our doctrines, a faith so much spoken against.

I have in my mind a Minister who in his later years adopted liberal and comprehensive views of Gospel truth, and who, by pursuing the course just hinted at, has succeeded, even in a village, in building up a numerous congregation of Liberal Christians, composed exclusively of those whose hands minister to their own necessities Like a teacher among his pupils, a father in the midst of his children, he leans over the pulpit and in the plainest possible language speaks of the great truths of religion, their application to the various circumstances of Life. His illustrations are drawn chiefly from habits of life and natural phenomena familiar to his hearers; and to render the impression more lasting, he not unfrequently makes use of provincial words and phrases. Occasional visitors call his style quaint, vulgar; but the fruits of his labour are seen in a regularly filled chapel, decided mental and moral improvement, and a cordial sympathy between pastor and flock. In his ow homely way he has done more for liberal Christianity in the course of a few years, than could be effected in a long lifetime by the more refined and prevalent mode of preaching.

Why are not Unitarian Christians more zealous in seeking to popularize the views they have peace and joy in believing? It cannot be that they undervalue their own principles. Their earnestness of profession is evidenced by the sacrifices they make from time to time to have suitable edifices erected for Divine worship, by the support they give to colleges and schools, and by the growing interest in Domestic missions to upraise the fallen. But extensive means are not employed to make known their views to the million. If we deem ourselves blessed in the enjoyment of a rational and life-giving faith we should hasten to extend that blessing to others. What though the actual results of former schemes may not have come up to the anticipations of the more sanguine? It is still our bounden duty to sow the seeds of truth, though some may fall among thorns, or on stony ground, or by the way side. Are pecuniary means wanting? It is said our denomination, numbers considered, is the wealthiest in England. But even were it far otherwise, "where there's a will there's a way." By judicious missionary effort much might be done to forward the great work of religious reformation; though much would remain to be done when there should be a more general system of public instruction. Education is greatly needed for the people. Not intellectual training merely. A knowledge of grammar, arithmetic, and the use of the globes will not suffice. There must be a faithful drawing out of man's moral and spiritual nature. This must be enlightened, expanded, elevated. Then will Christianity have free course and be glorified.

G. N. S.

BUT JESUS SAID, SUFFER LITTLE CHILDREN AND FORBID THEM NOT TO COME UNTO ME, FOR OF SUCH IS THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN."-MATTHEW XIX., 14.

SUFFER the little ones to come to me,

Forbid them not to hear my words of power;

Would ye that glorious fruit should load the tree,
Let the warm Sun beam on the opening flower.
Bring then, ye Mothers, bring them to my arms,
Your human blossoms in their infant charms.
Teach them the lessons that my lips impart.
Their's is no guile, no scorn, no haughty pride,
Gentle and pure is childhood's loving heart,
Meekly they trust, implicitly confide.
Bring, Mothers, your sweet innocents to me;
Such must the subjects of my Kingdom be.

Dear little ones! ye need a careful hand

To guide your footsteps through entangling snares;
The path ye tread to reach that glorious land,

Is thickly set with doubts, and fears, and cares;
Yet though the path with thorns and briers be rife,
Courage! brave little ones! the end is Life.

Life where no pain is felt, nor cares annoy,
Sweeter than spring with all her birds and flowers;
Life never ending, life of peace and joy,

Brighter than fairy land's resplendent bowers.
Bring willing hearts, dear little ones, to me,
And with me ever in my Kingdom be.

LECTURES ON ENGLISH HISTORY.

PART III.

J. A.

MUCH profitable interest might be excited by an account of the manners, customs, and habits of our Saxon forefathers as far as we have a competent knowledge of them, but I am compelled to dismiss this branch of our subject by briefly stating that the Saxons were very much behind most of the Continental nations in the arts, and especially the refinements of life; and that the Norman conquest, although for the time a fearful calamity, proved, ultimately, of the greatest advantage by opening an intercourse with other countries, thus weakening prejudice by expanding the mind, and giving some faint indications to it that all mankind are brethren. The Normans held themselves to be a polished people, and looked on the "Islanders," as they contemptuously termed the Anglo-Saxons, with much disdain. They, however, in some sense repaired the many injuries they inflicted by erecting many splendid works of architecture, building or beautifying towns, and bestowing much more expense and pains than had been done by the Saxons on their ecclesiastical edifices, as well as on their castles and more ordinary places of residence. It is also probable that Feudalism, a thing bad in itself, and utterly incompatible with free institutions, was of some benefit at the time in enforcing order and respect for the law. It is one of the advantages of a thoughtful study of History that it shows how evil things, even, are made to produce good: or rather, that evil is never unmixed, that some benefit ever results from it; whilst the converse is not less apparent, that earthly good is imperfect, that the very best things are continually liable to abuse.

The Feudal system, if not introduced by William the Conqueror, was consolidated by him. It may be necessary for the information of the younger part of my audience to explain the meaning of the term. Feudalism was a very complicated thing, wheels within wheels, and I know of nothing giving a more lively idea of it than a nest of chip-boxes, or the ingenious little toy of pear within pear, growing "fine by degrees, and beautifully less," till we come to one of extreme smallness. Under the Feudal system a kingdom, such as England, was divided into a certain number of parts called fiefs. The King, as supreme head, granted these fiefs to his great lords and captains, in reward for services performed. These estates were theirs, but held on the condition of doing services to the kingdom in return; if these were neglected, the estate reverted to the crown. As many of these fiefs were too large to be properly improved by an individual, the great feudatories were in the habit of parcelling out their fiefs to the lesser nobility on the same terms, and again these lessor barons would divide their fiefs, bestowing portions of them on their dependents. The most petty baron was nearly absolute in his own domain, whilst the King himself was regarded as only chief of all the barons. Hence they were frequently able to make head against the sovereign, as in the reign of John, when the barons compelled him to sign Magna Charta; and in the long and troublesome reign of his son and successor, Henry the Third, we find the barons frequently making war on the king, and at length taking him prisoner. The famous battle of Evesham, in Worcestershire, was fought between Henry and his barons. Many of our English kings held fiefs in France and Germany for possessions there, and rendered homage to the Sovereigns of those countries for them. John of England, for the murder of his nephew Arthur, was adjudged to have forfeited his Norman fiefs to his Sovereign, the King of France. "The Sovereign of a feudal kingdom, never appeared in greater glory than when he received the homage of his immediate vassals in his great court of parliament. Seated on his throne, in his royal robes, with his crown on his head, and surrounded by his spiritual and temporal nobles, he beheld his greatest prelates and most powerful barons, uncovered and unarmed, on their knees before him. In that humble posture they put their hands between his and solemnly promised to be his liege men, of life and limb and worldly worship, to bear faith and troth to him, to live and die with him, against all manner of men."

Yet amidst this barbarous splendour there was much meanness, of which the most ludicrous instances might be quoted, all tending to shew the very imperfect state of civilization then existing. Some rare specimens have been preserved by Hume, thus :-" The men of Gloucester paid one hundred shillings that they might have the liberty of selling and buying dyed cloth as formerly. Peter de Peraris gave twenty marks for leave to salt fishes, as Peter Chevalier used to do. Ralph de Brekham gave a hawk that the king would protect him, and this is a very frequent reason for payment. Richard de Neville gave the king twenty palfreys to obtain his request to Isolda Bisset that she would take him for a husband. Hugh Oisel was to give the king two robes, of a good green colour, to have the king's letters patent to the merchants of Flanders, with a request to render him one thousand marks which he lost in Flanders. Henry de Fortibus gave a Lombardy horse of value to have the king's request to Henry Fitz-Harvey that he would give him his daughter to wife." "It will, however," continues the historian," be just to remark, that the same ridiculous practices and dangerous abuses prevailed in Normandy, and probably in all the other states of Europe. England was not, in this respect, more barbarous than its neighbours."

It must not escape our notice, that the condition of the people, during the whole of the dark ages, was one of extreme depression, of hardship, and of rigour. Whatever may be fancied of the state of freedom under a prince such as Alfred, nothing can be more certain than that the mass of the population was in slavery. The labourer had no rights, he was truly, literally, an hereditary bondsman, just as is the modern serf of Russia, or the slave of Virginia. This state of things continued for many centuries; a change of dynasty was to the labouring serf only a change of masters; no beneficial effect was thereby wrought on his circumstances; Saxon or Norman, Plantagenet, Lancaster or York, were the same to him; whether Harold or William, Stephen or Henry reigned, he was the born thrall of his superior, bought and sold as the cattle on his estate. "The labourer who devoted his life to the cultivation of the soil, to the multiplication of comforts, to the production of wealth, and the sustenance of society, held the rights of living and breathing by a service, whose only limit, in one respect, was indefinite extent, and in the other, indefinite degradation." We read with horror of slave markets in other countries, and