thereat, and Brighton was not behind other places in petitioning and holding meetings. Sermons were preached, simultaneously, in nearly all the pulpits in the town, on the general question of the desecration of the Sabbath; thousands of tracts on the subject were distributed, and associations formed.

*

From this movement Mr. Robertson held aloof; he preached a sermon on the subject, which, to many minds, was most conclusive; and in reference to the controversy, which had become (on one side) very bitter, he wrote to a friend :

"As you will be here next week, I will not write you a volume, for nothing less would do. I preached on the subject on Sunday, satisfactorily to myself at least, a thing which has occurred to me but once or twice in all my ministry; so I am thoroughly prepared with an opinion on a matter I have well considered. I will say at present I am quite resolved to sign no petition. Dr. V.'s pamphlet does not go to the root of the matter. I agree with him in viewing the move, so far as it is an avowed innovation, with great jealousy, but I cannot ask for a State enactment to reimpose a law which Christianity has repealed, without yielding the very principle of Chris

*This Sermon is published in the Second Series of Mr. Robertson's Sermons, and should be read by any one desirous of understanding Mr. Robertson's views on this question, as it is treated there more completely than it was possible to do in a letter. There is also a Sermon on the "Shadow and Substance of the Sabbath," in the First Series, which may be read with advantage.

tianity. Historically, the Lord's Day was not a transference of the Jewish Sabbath at all from one day to another. St. Paul, in Rom. xvi. 5, 6, speaks of a religious non-observance of the Sabbath; I cannot say or think that the Crystal Palace affair is a religious non-observance, believing it to be merely a lucrative speculation; nevertheless, I have nothing to do with that. The Sabbath is abrogated, and the observance of a Day of Rest is only a most wise human law now, not to be enforced by penalties.. Besides, how dare we refuse a public concession to the poor man of a right of recreation which has been long assumed by the rich man with no protest or outcry from the clergy, who seem touched to the quick only when desecration, as they call it, is noisy and vulgar?"

His correspondent suggested, in answer, Bishop Horsley's critical treatment of the question, and to this letter he replied:

I am

"Horsley's Sermons' I only vaguely remember. quite at ease on the subject. The critical disposal of this or that text would not alter my views. I am certain of the Genius and Spirit of Christianity; certain of St. Paul's root thoughts-far more certain than I can be of the correctness or incorrectness of any isolated interpretation; and I must reverse all my conceptions of Christianity-which is the Mind of CHRIST-before I can believe the Evangelico-Judaic theory; which is, that Mr. . . . may, without infringement of the 4th Commandment, drive his carriage to church twice every Sunday, but a poor man may not drive his cart;—that the four or five hours spent in the evening by a noble lord over venison, champagne, dessert, and coffee, are no desecration of the command; but the same number spent by an artisan over cheese and beer in a tea-garden, will bring down

...

6

God's judgment on the land. It is worse than absurd. It is the very spirit of that Pharisaism which our Lord rebuked so sternly. And then men get up on platforms as . . . did; and quietly assume that they are the religious, and that all who disagree, whether writers in the Times,' Sir R. Peel, or the 'sad exceptions,' of whom I was one, to which he alluded, are either neologians or hired writers! Better break a thousand sabbaths than lie and slander thus! But the sabbath of the Christian is the consecration of all time to God; of which the Jewish Sabbath was but the type and shadow; see Col. ii. 16, 17. Bishop Horsley's attempt to get over that verse is miserable, I remember.

"Six hundred churches wanted.' Yes! but when shall we have different hours for service and different congregations in one church, say one for three congregations; and so save two thirds of the money spent on stone and brick, that it may be spent on the truer temple, human beings in whom God's Spirit dwells? They do this on the Continent, and with no inconvenience. Besides, the inconvenience and mutual giving way, would be all so much gain for Christian life, instead of an objection to the plan."

A member of his congregation wrote to him on this subject, and, as was his wont, he replied fully and frankly.*

The occasion on which the next speech was

That letter is not given here lest it should swell this Introduction to an undue limit, but it will be printed in a volume of "Letters on Theological, Philosophical, and Social Questions," which is now preparing for the press. It will not be out of place here to request that any one who may have received letters from Mr. Robertson on any of these topics would be so kind as to send them to the Editor of Mr. Robertson's Lectures, care of Messrs. Smith, Elder and Co., London. The letters shall be immediately copied and returned.

delivered, was one of the most interesting ever seen in Brighton. One hundred young men of Mr. Robertson's congregation signed an address to him, expressive of their gratitude for his unwearied zeal in their behalf. They invited him to tea at the Town Hall. Many others were also present, but all were men. That evening is well remembered still. It presented some remarkable features. One of the young men, Mr. C. H. Evans, rose and presented the address, and in doing so spoke with great feeling and earnestness of the benefit which he and the others, for whom he was that evening the mouth-piece, had received. from Mr. Robertson's teaching. He dwelt on the reconciling, harmonizing spirit Mr. Robertson had induced between rich and poor-between the strugglers in life and their lot. He reviewed the characteristics of Mr. Robertson's public ministry, and vindicated it from the charges which had recently been brought against it in the columns of a certain party journal; and having adverted to the altered state of feeling in the working classes of the town, which he attributed mainly to Mr. Robertson's efforts to bring about a union of classes, expressed an earnest hope that long—very long-might the town have the benefit of his talents and self-devotion.

All rose as he spoke. Mr. Robertson was

deeply moved. All felt that if there were many ministers like him, how far brighter would become the prospect of a kingdom of Heaven upon earth.

The last speech in this volume was delivered on the memorable occasion of the attempt of Pope Pius IX. to parcel out England into Ecclesiastical Dioceses under Romish bishops, with Cardinal Wiseman as the head of the new Hierarchy. Every one will remember how that attempt was received. From one end of England to the other, one unanimous voice arose," We will have nothing to do with Rome!" One of the largest meetings ever held at Brighton came together on this occasion to protest against this impertinent intrusion. All sects, all classes, met here on common ground-a stern determination that, whatever foreign despots might succeed in imposing on their peoples, Englishmen were determined never again to wear the yoke of priestly tyranny, least of all, the tyranny of Rome. It will be observed that the ground Mr. Robertson took was somewhat broader than that generally occupied. He rested his opposition to the Pope's decree on the inalienable rights of the individual conscience, in virtue of which it was not competent for any priest, or church, to dictate to men the terms of their belief.

Probably the controversy with Popery would be