get from the Connexion, and no more. Whether the Conference will adopt this plan remains to be seen. One thing, however, is certain, the next Conference will have to consider the remedy for the existing embarrassments of the Connexion, and its decisions will probably be looked forward to and accepted by the Connexion as a final settlement of the perplexing question.

We are materially assisted in the endeavour to remove evils by ascertaining their cause. So far as I am aware, the real cause of the embarrassment of the yearly collection, and especially of the paternal fund, has not been very distinctly pointed out to the Connexion. No doubt many persons understand it well enough; but I question whether the Connexion generally understands it. We have not, Mr. Editor, always been in debt. The claims both upon the yearly collection and the paternal fund have been honourably met; and for six years of the period during which I have attended Conference, the treasurer of the paternal fund has had a balance in hand. How, then, is it that we are in this mess now? The answer is painfully evident to any one who will take

the trouble to examine the public minutes of the Conference. The Conference, the whole Connexion nearly, was carried away at one fatal period by excited feelings and extravagant anticipations, originating in events which then agitated the Methodist family. Under those feelings we thought we could do anything. Large and expensive chapels sprang up in various parts of the Connexion as if by the wand of a magician, and we took an enormous stride in Connexional extension, forgetting, as almost the whole Connexion did, that at the same time we were incurring corresponding Connexional responsibilities.

The following table respecting the paternal fund, which I have drawn up from the public minutes of Conference, will make this matter clear. It ranges over a period of twenty years; that is, from 1829 to 1849, inclusive. The reader will see in the various columns the number of married and single preachers employed, the number of preachers called out, the number of children on the fund, the number of members in England, the income, expenditure, debt, and surplus of the fund, for each year of the whole period.

Now, every one must see from this table, that the laws which are essential to the safe and successful working of the Connexion have been overlooked or disregarded to an inexcusable extent, during several years of the period over which our survey extends. The laws to which I refer are,

1. That there should be something of a proportion between the number of members in the Connexion and the total number of preachers employed. And,

2. That there must be a proportion observed between the number of single and married preachers in the itinerancy.

If there are more preachers in the whole than are proportionate to the number of members, the quarterly meetings or circuits will feel the pressure; while, if there are more single preachers than are proportionate to the married, the yearly collection will first feel the pressure, in providing houses for them as they become married, and then the paternal fund will be pressed for the maintenance of the children. From calculations which I have made from the table, and other data, the details of which I have not room to give, I should say that whenever we have more than one preacher to 250 members we have too great a number, and shall feel the pressure both in our local and Connexional funds. And whenever we have more than one single preacher to two married ones there will be a pressure, first, upon the yearly collection, to assist the circuits in finding houses for them; and then, next, upon the paternal fund. I here give the highest proportion of the single to the married preachers. A more accurate proportion would be two single to five married preachers. Of course, if the scale of contribution both to our local and connexional fund were raised we might increase the number of ministers.

But what does this table show? Let the reader glance at the figures in the line for 1835, and he will find that no less than FIFTEEN preachers were called out that year; and if he will look downwards in the column,

till he get to 1840, he will find that in five years, namely, from 1835 to 1840, the enormous number of FIFTY-TWO preachers were called out; while during the whole of the other fifteen years of the twenty, only thirty-seven were called out. And he will observe further, that in 1837 the number of single preachers were, within six, equal to the married ones; and in 1838 there was only the difference between them of eight.

Now, every one who understands the working of the Connexion, would expect that from about 1842 there would be a great scarcity of houses in the Connexion for the preachers as they became married, unless a sufficient number of the married preachers should retire to make room for the new comers; or, on the other hand, the capabilities of the circuits should be increased, so as to enable them to take a greater number of married preachers. Neither of these things happened, and hence came the enormous burdens to bear which the yearly collection had to provide for the claimants. But the pressure could not stop here. As the married preachers increased so would their families. But the number of members in the societies, and the natural income of the paternal fund, did not increase in proportion. Thus in 1846 we had nearly twice the number of married preachers and twice the number of children on the fund that we had in 1829, whereas we had not an increase of one-third in the number of members; and the income of the fund, exclusive of the Book-room profits, (from which source the fund received nothing in 1829,) was only about £220 more than in 1829. In 1829 the income of the fund, without Book-room profits, was £444 17s. lld. In 1846 the income was £668, without Book-room profits.

This disparity between the claims on the fund and the number of members and income of the society, may, I am aware, be partly accounted for by the troubles of 1841 and 1842. But if the secessions of those years had not occurred, the

pressure on the paternal fund would have been much the same; for the members we lost were not generally liberal supporters of the fund, and it did not long suffer by the absence of their donations.

Our present embarrassments are, therefore, clearly traceable to a definite cause. To Barkerism, partly, but chiefly to the over-sanguine policy of the Conference from 1835 to 1840. The checks which the Conference held in its hands against any undue pressure on the funds, it did not use. Almost every circuit

which asked to be divided was divided. Almost every application for an additional single preacher was granted; and so affluent was the Conference that in several instances, and for several years, Two single preachers were sent to the same circuit with one married preacher! The result is what we all see and what we all deplore.

But now as to the remedies. Shall we ever get out of our difficulties? Certainly we shall. During the last nine years we have only called out twenty-one preachers, and the proportion of the single to the married preachers has not exceeded the proper standard. One thousand pounds, at least, will be required each year for about six or seven years, and there will then be a considerable diminution of claims on the fund. In ten years, if we pursue our present policy, there will be a surplus in hand, supposing that even the income is no greater than at present. As to raising the £1000 per annum, more or less, can any one say there is any insuperable difficulty in the way? We want £200 more than we have. Just threepence per member, or with the increased profits of the Book-room, perhaps not more than twopence per member. Is this too much to expect? I cannot believe it.

But then there is the debt. Well, let us pay it off. Surely that is not to "frighten us from our propriety." Why, half-a-crown apiece from every member will pay all the debts we owe on both the paternal fund and yearly collection. Less than a penny per week from each member for the

next year will sweep these debts away. Can not we raise this? Let the Connexion remember that these debts and deficiencies have accrued by adopting means to serve and gratify the circuits; they are the debts and deficiencies of the whole Connexion. Every man of us is responsible for them; and if ever they are to be met and paid, every man must help.

Fearing, however, to trench on ground which belongs to the finance department among our authorities, I forbear further remark on the removal of our debts. But I may be permitted to mention a few inferences which the statistics I have furnished suggest.

1. The Conference cannot compel the people to give money, but it can regulate the supply of agencies, and thereby limit the scale of its expenditure. It can determine what proportion the single preachers bear to the married ones, and whether the former are likely to tread upon the heels of the latter in obtaining possession of the houses in the Connexion. Having wisely considered this, they will also have regulated the demands upon the paternal fund, so that there may be some reasonable proportion between the supply and demand.

2. For no conceivable reason can the Conference be justified in stationing two single preachers in any circuit. Any immediate advantage gained, either by the circuit or the Connexion, by this kind of appointment, will be more than counteracted by the subsequent results of the system on the Connexional and local funds.

3. No single preacher should be stationed in a circuit hereafter applying for one, except that circuit will give a written pledge to furnish its quota to the paternal fund, as well as in due course of time provide a house for a married preacher.

4. The single preacher should be withdrawn from circuits which will not furnish their share of the Connexional funds. The reasonableness and justice of these regulations cannot but be apparent, since every circuit which employs a single

preacher is thereby providing claims upon all our Connexional funds.

5. Let the plan which now, though much too late, has been hit upon by the finance committee, of making a specific levy upon each circuit, be persevered in, and depend upon it, we shall ultimately obtain the needful funds. Above all,

6. Let us with a single eye strive to glorify God by all our Connexional arrangements and movements, and he will lead us on as he has hitherto done, blessing us and making us a blessing.

I remain, dear sir,

Yours affectionately,
J. H. ROBINSON.

A SECOND LETTER ON THE PATERNAL FUND, BY A LAYMAN.

TO THE EDITOR.

DEAR SIR,-I have just read Mr. Ridgway's circular respecting some of the Connexional debts, but more especially the paternal fund. For one, I am much obliged to Mr. Ridgway, for the trouble and cost he has been at to place before us the danger we are in from supineness, and the want of a liberal spirit in supporting the cause of Christ. The current expenses of each year ought to be met annually; and if we asked ourselves the question sincerely,

"What shall I render to my God,

For all his gifts to me?" there would be no lack of means. I had been intending, for some time past, to draw your attention to the paternal fund, but an unwillingness to write kept me from doing so. Really it is high time for the richer part of our friends and Christ's followers, and indeed for all, to be impressed with their obligation to support the paternal fund. It is a subject for individuality. The mind is too apt to shift these responsibilities as long as there are other minds that will bear them and other means to support them. We are too much disposed to put from us the dark future, but as Mr. Ridgway correctly intimates, if we do not grapple successfully with present difficulties, the day of reckoning will come, with responsibilities vastly increased; and is it right to be laying up difficulties

for our children and future members of the church? Let it not be. If we are men, if we are fathers, if we have the love of Christ dwelling in us, the present state of things will not continue.

Look at the subscription list for Macclesfield. We are not doing any thing like what we ought to do. When I look at my own I am ashamed of it, and intend to double it, and if the friends would give this their prayerful consideration, they will, in most cases, double, and in some cases treble, and even quadruple their subscriptions. Besides, many additional subscribers may be, and ought to be, added to the list. Other places I perceive are as bad as Macclesfield. Something should be said to convince us all of this great sin. I confess to you, Mr. Editor, we are too selfish; we love money too much, and we never say to ourselves we have enough, but after we have been blessed by Providence with prosperity we too often in effect, say, I am secure now, God's cause and people may do as they will for me. If there is one being more worthy of contempt than another, it is the man whom religion found poor and friendless, but who, by the influence of religion, by the blessing of God, and the attention of christian friends, has been raised to affluence, but now gives penuriously to the cause of God, and allows the money to drop from him as blood from a palsied limb. To my mind such men are of all others the most despicable. I do hope some of the influential and hearty friends in each circuit will join their esteemed superintendent and ministers, and canvas every likely member, and every hearer who may have means. In general, from the pulpit down to the humblest member, we want more soul.

I remain, Yours affectionately, A MEMBER OF THE MACCLESFIELD CHURCH. Macclesfield, February 19th, 1850.

EDITORIAL REMARKS.

These letters are worth more than gold. They are invaluable, and their writers deserve the best thanks

of the Connexion. Most sincerely do we tender our thanks to the worthy friends who have written them. These letters, proceeding as they do, one from a minister, and the other from an estimable lay friend, harmonize well with our principles, which happily associate the ministry and laity together in all Connexional matters. As preachers we do not shut ourselves up in close Conference to legislate and govern, and then tell the people they have nothing to do but furnish the means. Nor do our lay friends manifest ambition to enjoy the honour of a seat in Conference, and leave to ministers all the drudgery of begging. We work together both in Conference and out of Conference. The measures adopted at our Conference are the people's measures, and hence they feel their obligations to sustain them. These correct views and correct feelings are growing in the Connexion, and they will grow and bring forth more abundantly the fruits of peace and prosperity.

These letters are just the kind we wanted to set the Connexion right. Mr. Robinson gives us a clear and correct explanation as to the cause of our financial difficulties, and the manner in which their immediate pressure may be met and their future recurrence prevented. His statistical exhibition of facts shows also that we have as good reason for hope as for generosity and economy. It is satisfactory to see the lowest depths of our difficulties, and encouraging to know that we can fathom them.

The letter of our excellent friend from Macclesfield breathes the right spirit. It contains no croaking, no despondency, no repudiation of obligations, no mean attempt to reduce the small amount allowed from the fund, no selfish purpose to save himself and burden others, but exhibits a candid and benevolent spirit in every line. It does our soul good to read such a letter as this. It lightens our labours, it nerves our hand, and under its inspiring influence we cannot but predict that the day of our deliverance is near. We doubt not there are scores and hundreds of similar spirits in different parts of the Connexion, who will feel a response to every sentiment contained in this excellent letter. Only let this feeling prevail, and our pecuniary difficulties will vanish, and the approaching Conference will be a season of mutual congratulation, and of thanksgiving to our God.

We are glad to learn that some of the smallest and poorest circuits in the Connexion are realizing for the paternal fund the full amount fixed upon them by the financial committee, thus setting an example to the larger and wealthier parts of the Connexion. When we look at these facts, and connect them with the noble and successful efforts recently made to reduce chapel debts and local burdens, we cannot for a moment doubt either the willingness or the ability of the Connexion to extinguish the existing debts on the paternal fund and the yearly collection.

TRIFLES.Nothing is a trifle which is displeasing to our friend. If every body thought so, and acted upon the thought, there would not so often arise that dull, bad weather, those cloudy feelings, those little bitter disagreeables, by which married people, brothers and sisters, parents and children, by degrees embitter one another's lives, and which create altogether that great, grey, heavy, oppressive cloud, discomfort. A fly is a very light burden, but if it were per

petually to return and set itself on our nose, it might weary us of our very lives. By the side of the above motto, we should inscribe on the tablets of home, "Nothing is insignificant which gives pleasure to our friend." Because from this arises that bright summer-mild atmosphere in the house which is called comfort. And without this, how cold, how miserable is home anywhere!-Fre derika Bremer.