have deliberately obstructed the free course of God's truth, or have warred against the sacred rights of the soul.

In the defence of the principles which he thus asserted, our late venerable pastor was ever ready to engage with the zeal, and ardor, and perseverance becoming a great and good cause. He was their champion in all suitable places. In associations, in conventions, in ecclesiastical councils his voice was raised in their behalf, and he uttered his indignant rebuke at any attempt to violate them. All, which he did in this cause cannot now be known; many records of his labors passed away with the occasions which called them forth. But, of the thirty-six behind him, several

separate publications which he left are an express vindication of religious liberty, and all breathe a free, healthful air which could not have been derived from one whose love of religious freedom was not consistent, ardent and sincere. In his two principal works, those on which his permanent reputation will rest-the Life of Washington, published in 1807, and the volume of Controversial Sermons, published in 1822, you see the mind and the spirit of the man. In selecting Washington as the subject of his interesting and instructive biography, he seems to have been attracted by a sympathy with the grandeur of his character and his generous sacrifices in the cause of freedom. No one could have so painted the struggles of the chieftain, or have penned the concluding words of that life, whose heart did not throb with a kindred emotion. "Uniting the talents of the soldier (these are the words) with the qualifications of the statesman, and pursuing, unmoved by difficulties, the noblest end by the purest means, he had the supreme satisfaction of beholding the complete success of his great mil.

not abated his interest in the welfare of the community, nor the snows of eighty winters quenched the flames of religious freedom which were early enkindled in his bosom.*

From what has been said, let it not be inferred that he loved strife, or that his preaching was ordinarily of a polemic character. There is no ground for such an inference. He was accustomed to take a wide range in the choice of his subjects, and was unusually happy in bring ing out the meaning of the difficult passages of scripture, and in giving lessons of sound and practical duty. He was fervent, strikingly appropriate, and often eloquent in prayer; and none could habitually sit under his ministry, and carry out his suggestions into the life, without acknowledging the general soundness of the preacher, and finding themselves in the path of religious wisdom and improvement.

* He was no bigot; but his love of liberty was rational as well as ardent. This admits of ample proof. On disputed points of doctrine, he most religiously avoided giving a bias to the minds of his children while they were too young to judge for themselves. One of them, while yet of a tender age, away from home, hearing much discussion respecting the doctrine of future punishment, wrote to him to inquire his views on the subject. Instead of making them known, he sent the three best treatises on the three most prominent theories. Again, one day a daughter, during the hottest of the contest between the Liberal and Orthodox parties, in which he was deeply interested, attracted by the encomiums she had heard, asked leave to read Dr. Channing's Letters to Dr. Worcester: -"And have you read Dr. Worcester's Letters," inquired he? As she answered, no, with some expressions of disparagement- What," said he, with considerable warmth, "are you a daughter of mine, and do you read only one side of the question?"

The circumstances of which we have spoken, in which our venerable friend was placed in the beginning, and through which, from time to time, he passed, did something perhaps to form, certainly afforded occasion for the display of a noble character, one which it is impossible to regard but with gratitude and affection. At first his position was peculiar. He had assumed new principles, and adopted opinions differing, in some particulars, from the received opinions of the day; and, as it is the world's wont, he was the mark of much bitterness, and the storm of prejudice gathered around him. His ministerial brethreu regarded him with coldness and suspicion. He was denied ministerial fellowship and the Christian name. He was talked against, preached against, denounced, and shunned; and for seven long years pursued his almost solitary way performing all the duties of his office, warding off calumny, removing misrepresentation, explaining, defending, subjected, in a word, to every species of petty provocation; and yet, through this trial, one of the severest to which the human character can be subjected, he passed unscathed. Alike superior to frowns and flatteries, unalarmed by the fears of the timid, unseduced by the confidence of the presumptuous, he calmly and serenely followed his appointed path.* And it was a source of

If it were asked what was the most prominent trait in him, I think those who knew him most intimately would answer, his moral courage. He was never deterred by his fears from doing what he deemed his duty. Nor was he at all deficient in physical courage. The battle of Lexington occurred during the college vacation. As soon as the tidings of it reached his native place, he seized his musket, and, joining his friends and kinsmen, marched as a volunteer to Cambridge; - but did not arrive until the British were safely enVOL. XIII. NO. 148.

grateful reflection to him to the last, to which he often referred, that in the darkest period of his life, when nnkind and bitter things were said, when the storm of calumny poured down upon him, no allegations of a moral nature were ever laid to his charge. A suspicion of reproach never sullied the purity of his character. And this was not because he maintained a cold reserve and practised habitual concealment. No man was ever more frank and open than he. There was a truthfulness and consistency about him which immediately impressed the mind. His tongue was the index of his heart. There were no subterfuges no double dealings in him. If, therefore, no charges were ever made against his character, it is because there was no ground for charges; there was nothing in him which he wished to conceal. Accordingly, he was ever regarded a fair and manly opponent, who scorned to resort to petty artifice, and seize on unworthy measures. While he was true to the friends and the cause which he

trenched on the hills of Charlestown. Another instance of his personal courage is given: - During the insurrection, when the town was in possession of the army of Shays, the officers took the liberty to billet themselves out upon the inhabitants. It was a period of public anxiety and alarm, and few had the courage to resist the demands, thus made at the head of armed troops, upon their hospitality. Dr. Bancroft, whose feelings were strongly enlisted against the popular movement, took his measures. He barred the doors of his house and stationed himself without, on the door-step. A file of officers was presently seen riding in the direction of his dwelling — approached and demanded for themselves a shelter for the night. He peremptorily refused, told them he regarded them as rebels, and that they should obtain no entrance into his house except by violence. Impressed by the decision of his tone and manner, they thought it prudent to retire and seek quarters elsewhere.