We are bound to deal with them as we do with the heathen. We support ministers and churches, teachers and schools, among the Indians, even where the Indians contribute nothing to these objects, but we refuse to do this for our own fellow-citizens, and for the baptized members of our own church. We are not surprised, therefore, that the rule of an equal dividend, (i. e., security for an adequate support,) was adhered to in the Free Church of Scotland. In connection with this system for sustaining pastors, there may be, and should be, a plan for the support of itinerant ministers, evangelists, whose adequate support may require a less sum than is needed for a settled pastor.

Assuming, then, that the church should aim at securing for every settled minister devoted to his work a salary, say, of eight hundred dollars a year, allowing every congregation to supplement that salary to any amount, and in any way it sees fit, the next question is, how is a fund adequate for that purpose to be raised? It is obvious that it cannot be done without thorough organization and constant supervision by the officers. of the churches.

As already insisted upon, contributions must be sought from all classes of the people-from the poor as well as from the rich. All must coöperate in a scheme which contemplates the advantage of all, and the advancement of the kingdom of the common Lord of all. In Scotland every parish is divided into districts. Each district is assigned to a deacon or some other person to act as collector. This collector has a book containing the names of all persons connected with the congregation living in his district. It is his duty to call upon each individual, and ascertain how much each is willing to contribute during the year to the sustentation fund, and whether the subscribers prefer to pay weekly, monthly, or quarterly. It is his further duty to collect these subscriptions and to forward the amount to the Treasurer of the fund. Measures must of course be taken to organize and sustain this vast machinery. It will not rise of itself; nor will it continue in successful operation without constant supervision and stimulus. Hence the necessity of a Financial Committee or Central Agency. According to Dr. Chalmers the principles which should regulate the constitution of such a committee are, 1. That it should be com

posed principally of laymen-men trained in counting-houses or "chambers of agency." 2. That it would be "monstrous impolicy in the church to confide altogether, or in very great proportion, so large an interest as her Sustentation Fund to the discretionary and unremunerated attendance even of her most zealous and best qualified adherents. There ought to be a greatly fuller paid agency, and with all the guaranties for a vigorous and punctual discharge of our business, which obtain in our national offices, or in any of the great trading establishments of the country. And first, in addition to a treasurer with the proper complement of clerks, there should be a Lay Superintendent, whose business it is, whether by personal visits, or by the emanations of a central correspondence, to keep the whole machinery of the Associations constantly and vigorously a going." "It is of the utmost importance to our financial prosperity, that we should have a Superintendent of thorough business ability and habits, under the control, at the same time, and surveillance of a Committee, mainly composed of business men." 3. There should also, he says, "be a Clerical Correspondent, who, besides seeing to the preparation and issue of tracts and circulars, charged with the high matters of principle and religious duty, should hold converse chiefly, if not exclusively, with the ministers of the Free Church. Without an office of this sort, both well filled and well executed, our present financial returns will not be increased, will not even be upholden. If left exclusively in the hands of secular men, the whole financial system will be secularized, after which it will infallibly go to pieces. Our's is essentially a religious operation for a religious object, and if separated from the religious principle by which it is kept in healthful and living play, then, as if bereft of its needful and sustaining aliment, it will wither into extinction in a few years." 4. He urges the appointment of agents to visit the Associations, putting them into action and good order, and setting up new ones. "This," he says, "is the true way of making the life-blood of our cause circulate from the heart to extremities of Scotland." "We do hope," he adds, "that these mighty advantages will reconcile the church to the expenses of a larger paid agency. There is a prejudice, I had almost said, a low-minded suspicion, on this subject, most

grievously adverse to the enlargement of the Church's resources and her means. The sum of two thousand pounds or even three thousand, and perhaps more, rightly expended on right men, would be remunerated more than fifty-fold by the impulse thus given to the mechanism of our Associations."

These views of a man so remarkable for his constructive genius as Dr. Chalmers, and so revered for his character and services, are submitted for the consideration of those who may favour the adoption of the plan of a sustentation fund for the ministry of our church.

Such is the general outline of the scheme. The considerations in favour of its adoption are briefly as follows:

1. It is practicable. What has been done, may be done. What has been carried out successfully for years in Scotland, may be carried out in America. It is true the work is far more extensive here than there, and has difficulties to encounter here which were not to be overcome there. But if our work be the more difficult, it is more necessary, and we have more men and greater resources, so that in proportion to the strength of the two bodies, the Free Church of Scotland had perhaps as heavy a burden to bear as can ever be imposed on us. That this plan of a general sustentation fund is practicable, is proved not only by the example of the Free Church, but also by that of the Methodists. Among that extensive and flourishing body of Christians, the minister is not made dependent on the particular church to which he preaches, but is sustained by the general funds of the body as a whole. This general fund is supplied in part from the weekly contributions of the members, and partly from the profits of their extensive "book concern." How efficient this scheme has proved in their hands, is proved by the experiment both in England and America. In answer to the cavil that the plan of a general contribution was "a proposal to grind the faces of the poor for the support of an ecclesiastical system," Dr. Chalmers says, "These reasoners would be puzzled to understand how it is that the Methodists of England, many of them in humble life, give their shilling a month, or even their six-pence a week, for the maintenance of the gospel. Why, after all, they form the best conditioned and most prosperous community in the empire. The truth is, that

instead of what they give being extracted from the earnings of their hard and honest industry, it were far more correct to say, in reference to the great majority of their converts, that what they give is the spontaneous tribute of but a fraction from the squanderings of their former extravagance." Presbyterians of this country, it is hoped, will not be disposed to pronounce impracticable, what has been actually accomplished by their brethren in Scotland, and by other bodies of believers both in Europe and America.

We

2. Another consideration in favour of this plan, is that it is only the application to the home-field of the principle on which we act in the foreign field. When we send a missionary to the heathen, it is not on his own charges. We do not tell him to gather his support from the people to whom he carries the gospel, or sustain himself as he best can. We know that the heathen cannot, or will not support him; and we know that if required to support himself either in whole or in part, his efficiency as a missionary would be impaired or destroyed. therefore pledge the faith of the church that he shall be sustained. This is right; it is Christian; it is necessary. Why should not the same principle be acted upon at home? Souls here are as valuable as the souls of the heathen. The necessity of a pastor. supporting himself is as inconsistent with his efficiency here as it is abroad; it is as much in contravention of the command of Christ and of the spirit of the gospel in the one case as in the other. The suffering entailed by the neglect of this duty is as great in this country as it would be anywhere else.

3. Another great recommendation of a sustentation fund is that it would enable the church to secure the service of the numerous ministers who are now unoccupied. What that number is we are unable accurately to determine. The estimates which we have seen vary so much that they cannot be relied upon. The lowest estimate places the number at several hundred. Whenever a vacancy occurs in a self-sustaining church, the pulpit is crowded with candidates. Many men in the prime of life, of high culture and attainments, are obliged to seek for months, or even years, before they can find a field of labour to which they feel authorized to take their families.

From these facts some have inferred that the ministry is overstocked, that the supply exceeds the demand, and they therefore call for curtailing the number of ministers and candidates. These men know not what they do. The complaint is not that the church is overrun by unconverted or incompetent ministers; but that we have too many really pious and well qualified men in the sacred office. Those who make this objection profess to believe that the Holy Ghost as truly calls men to the ministry as he calls them to faith and salvation. The church through her appropriate organs solemnly declares, that, in her judgment, every man whom she ordains, is called of God to the ministry of the word. As the complaint is not of remissness, or want of fidelity on the part of the presbyteries, it is in fact a complaint against the Holy Spirit. He has been too lavish in his calls. If this is revolting; if this shocks every Christian's mind, it is not our fault. We simply put into plain English the real meaning of those who complain that we have too many faithful and well qualified men in the ministry. What is true in this matter, and all that is true, is, that we have more ministers than we have self-sustaining churches; more men whom God has called to preach the gospel, than the church is willing to support. There is the difficulty. If we should do our duty, we would find that God would multiply the ministry ten-fold, and increase an hundred-fold the ability and willingness of the church to support them all. It is difficult for the individual to obtain Christian symmetry of character. Some are prominent for one virtue and deficient in another. So it is with churches. Some are more devoted to the care of the poor than to foreign missions; some to education than to sustentation. What is needed is, not that the work well done should be neglected, but that what has been neglected should be properly attended to. If we, as a church, have prayed more, and laboured more, in order that God would send labourers into his harvest, than that he would give his people wisdom and liberality to provide for their support, we should not complain that he has answered our prayers, but seek for grace to turn his gifts to advantage.

The objection that the ministry is overstocked can be made by those only who forget that the field is the world; that Christ