without endowing the theory of Newton or the opposite theory of most modern inquirers; as easily as act on the principles of universal justice without teaching with some that they are connate, or with others that they are acquired. They ought to practise truth, but they ought not to diffuse it. The one, we repeat, is within their province, the other is beyond it.

12. "What defence, then," it may be further objected, "can be given of parliamentary grants in aid of the education of the people, of which voluntaries have ever been ready to avail themselves, and of which, therefore, they may be supposed to approve."

The defence and explanation of the conduct of dissenters are obvious. The grants of parliament are in no case grants for the diffusion of opinions, least of all of religious opinions, but bounties for the encouragement and cultivation of the arts; a school grant for the encouragement of the art of reading, whether English or Greek; a medical grant, of anatomy and physic. Opinions are doubtless diffused, just because a man cannot be taught to read without books, or books be written without pages, or pages without paragraphs, or paragraphs without sentences, or sentences, etymologically defined at least, without meaning; but the diffusion of them is no more the

end of the endowment than the importation of Parian marble is the end of a national gallery of sculpture, or the encouragement of the woollen trade the end of a standing army; or if it be, government patronage is unwise and unjust.

It is, of course, not intended to intimate that a knowledge of the art of reading or of anatomy is education,—“ a training up of the child in the way he should go," but it is maintained that it is the only department of education with which a government ought ever to interfere; and even in that department its bounty must be administered with a cautious and an equal hand. Other departments are entrusted to the Christian parent and the Christian church.*

This principle, which we deem of the very greatest importance, we wish, then, to lay down as broadly and as distinctly as possible. Funds contributed by the people-taxes imposed by the state for the general purposes of government-ought not to be devoted to the maintenance or diffusion of opinions or faith.

* We must confess, that we regard all schemes of national education with suspicion; not because afraid of knowledge, but partly because we have no great faith in the moral advantages of instruction purely secular, and partly because we feel it to be difficult to apply the principle which we have just laid down to the regulation of the extent of government patronage. Would it not be well if our missionary societies devoted more of their funds to the religious education of the young?

Be they true or false, on questions of divine science or of human policy, the civil ruler has no right to hinder or to aid them. The sole duty of his office is the promotion of the civil interests, - -the safety, health, liberty, and happiness,-of his subjects. His "concernment for men's souls," and his " care of the commonwealth," should agree in teaching him to "leave them alone."

13. To most of the arguments by which this plain and comprehensive principle is supported there has been already a frequent allusion, and therefore it is only necessary that we repeat them. It is certainly in accordance with the law of nature, which teaches us--that we ought to attain the greatest possible degree of happiness and liberty consistent with the rights of others,—that by state churches these rights are violated, that the violation of them could not have been sanctioned at the institution of government,—that, if it had been so sanctioned, it would still have been unjust, because, for their thoughts and faith, men are accountable only to God,-and that, even if they be accountable to men, the temporal sanctions of the civil ruler are but little likely to correct them. It is equally in accordance with every precept of reason,-one of whose plainest lessons is, that it is absurd to attempt to force a nation to think with their rulers, in place of thinking in consistency

with what they deem conclusive evidence, iniquitous to compel them to support what they do not believe, execrable to punish them for believing and acting as God as enjoined; and with every decision of prudence and practical wisdom, which stamps with the character of folly every scheme that proposes to win men over to truth, by identifying it with a system of proscription such as none but an angel's nature might bear, that offers to teach them the "obedience of faith," by first practising them in rebellion,-that seeks to perpetuate the true liberty of the people by making them submit to mental and moral slavery, and offers to give to government all the security of endowed truth by repeatedly endangering and breaking the public peace, that thinks to promote the piety of the church by making its ministers dependent upon the most secular of all trusts, or the unity of the church by stigmatizing dissentient sects, whom it first makes dissentient by the establishment of matters left uncertain or indifferent,-that suggests the possibility of adding to the hearty supporters of truth by rewarding conformity and punishing conscientious dissent, and of diffusing the truth by taking away its best and most popular evidence, the disinterested, unsuspected devotedness of its friends. With scripture precept and scripture example this principle is equally inconsistent: they teach-that he who receives

the ministers of the cross is to support them,* not according to legal enactment, but according to the purpose of his own heart,†—that religion is accepted just so far as it is voluntary, when compelled it is an abomination, that the sanctions of the gospel are all of them spiritual and future, not present or temporal,§-that our Saviour himself expressly disowned the aids of the civil power,||-that to Christ only are we accountable for our faith, T-that he has invested the church with powers amply sufficient for its own management,**—that, in matters of religious duty, Christians are free from every law but that of love, and are to "do nothing of necessity," nor against their own persuasion,††-that not even apostles have "dominion over their faith," much less the civil magistrate, that the care of men's souls has been entrusted, not to others, but to themselves; if children, to their parents; and if ignorant or indifferent, to the pity and affectionate labours of the church,§§-and that, as every soul ought to be "subject to the higher powers," this precept cannot be obeyed so long as

* Gal. vi. 6; Luke, x. 7, 8. † 2 Cor. viii. 12; ix. 4—7. Isaiah, lxi. 8. || See page 138. James, iv. 12; Rom. xiv. 4; 1 Cor. ii. 15.

§ See page 136.

** John, xviii. 36; 2 Cor. x. 3-6; Luke, xii. 14; 1 Cor. vi. 4. ++ 1 Cor. vii. 23; Gal. v. 14, 16, 13.

2 Cor. i. 24; 1 Peter, v. 2, 3.

§§ Eph. vi. 4; 2 Tim. ii. 21-26; Phil. ii. 15, 16, &c.