human race is not designed by its Marker to improve in physical, intellectual, or moral condition by their own exertions, and that it is their duty to submit to whatever evils they may be suffering, without an effort or a wish to remove them. It is an argument, too, which makes the world a scene of probation in this respect for only one portion of its inhabitants,-those, who are wicked enough to bring calamities upon their own heads, or so unfortunate as to be weighed down by the misconduct of others and the various accidents of life, or who are too weak, or unskilful, or ignorant to avoid them. But if it is the duty of these to gather instruction and to improve under their bitter experience, what is the duty, and what is the proof of the virtue of those, who possess the means and opportunity of lessening the severity or the length of their trials? who might inform the ignorance which allows, or relieve the wants which urge them to be guilty and miserable? Is there no correspondence between the situation of the poor, and the duty of the rich? between the necessities of the ignorant, and the abilities of those who are better informed? For what purpose are the goods of this world unequally bestowed, but for the trial of the virtue of both classes, those who abound, and those who suffer need? If we are to avoid relieving the necessitous, till we are sure that we are not encouraging vice, till it is ascertained to be a fact that every man has learnt from experience that wickedness brings misery in its train, we fear that the evils incurred will be infinitely greater than those which are avoided. The vices of one class will not be prevented, while the peculiar virtues of another will be annihilated. The true inference from the unquestionable fact, that benevolent exertions are frequently unavailing and perverted, and that kindness is sometimes requited by obstinate villany, is, that these efforts and this liberality have been misapplied and ill-judged; not that it is unnecessary to be benevolent, much less that it is wrong, but that it is equally necessary to be cautious as to be kind, to be prudent as to be generous. And will the rich and the wise sit down contented to be surpassed in ingenuity by the poor and the ignorant? or should they not rather be excited, by the perversion of their bounty from its intended course, to devise new expedients to benefit those who are their own worst enemies? Will they be persuaded that because their indolent and ill-directed, or even their more judicious and considerate efforts at charity, have been unavailing, therefore no ingenuity can devise and no patience execute a more effectual plan? The more difficult it is, the greater is the necessity and the stronger the call upon men of talents, of practical skill, and of sound judgment, to engage

in such undertakings, and they will at least deserve the praise of combating, and, we trust, of conquering difficulties.

We take great pleasure in again calling the attention of our readers, and requesting their patronage to a society, in the organization and conduct of which there appears to have been thus far an uncommon union of zeal and discretion. Without any extravagant expectations of operating an immediate and violent change in the moral habits of the lower classes of the community, the Society for Employing the Poor have undertaken what, it seems to us, will, upon their plan, be neither difficult in the execution nor doubtful in its success. They propose to furnish employment for those of the poor who may be disposed to request it;-not at the usual rates, for it would be impossible in that case to supply all who would make application, but at something less than the ordinary wages of labour; thus offering a resource to the destitute, without presenting a temptation to those who are in regular employment. "On the other hand, the common standard price will be charged by the Society for the labour done. Were it not so, a temptation would be offered to withdraw work from the valuable class of labouring poor, and bring it to the Society, thus depriving many industrious persons of the occupations on which they depend. Such an effect, it is manifest, would increase instead of diminishing the evil, and would be directly opposite to the main design of the Institution." This appears to us exceedingly judicious. We are indeed compelled to yield our unqualified approbation to the whole theory of this excellent Institution, and we have only to hope that its operations may be guided by the same zeal which led to its establishment, and the same skill which dictated its provisions. There are two points only to which we wish to direct the attention of the managers. The first is, the selecting and retaining of a judicious and attentive agent. It is obviously of the last importance to the usefulness of the society, that the agent should be both able and willing to carry its plans into effect, and it requires no small share of discretion and diligence to do this in the best manner. We are happy to learn that such is the character of the present agent, and we trust such a one will always be found, for upon that, we conceive, rests in a great degree, the success and usefulness of the society. The other is, the prudent regulation of the quantity of work distributed. There is a strong temptation in a new institution like this, to make unnecessary and injurious exertions in the outset. It is far better that the quantity of work should at first be less, than that it should be greater, than the society can continue to supply. A steady and regular in

crease is an object to be particularly desired any diminution in the quantity, is not merely a diminution of the good accomplished, but a creation of positive evil, producing new disappointment and suffering in those who have been benefited by the existence of such a society. It would be better that such a one should never have been formed, than that in its commencement it should furnish a considerable quantity of material for exercising the industry of the poor, which should gradually decrease with the cooling zeal of the members. It seems particularly desirable, too, at first view, to furnish employment for as great a number as possible; but the same quantity of work, which, distributed among many, will be productive of little benefit to each individual, might be so arranged as to give important relief to a smaller number; and thus produce, as we think, the greatest good on the whole.

We would caution our readers against running into the error of supposing that they will acquit themselves of all their obligations to the poor by giving them something to do, or that by sending work to this society they can at once be charitable and thrifty. The following extract from the Explanation of the View of the Society, sets in a just light what should be the object of every subscriber.

These charitable purposes will, it is hoped, be kept constantly in view by those, whose humanity may induce them to become contributors. They should remember, that however their own convenience may sometimes be promoted by employing the labour of the poor, it is not for that purpose the Society exists. In sending work, let them consider rather the good that may be done for others, than the advantage that may result to themselves. Let them study to select such kinds of employment as will best answer the benevolent design of the Institution. Let them not confine themselves simply to what their own occasions may demand, but often send their work with no other view, than to encourage and assist the poor. It is especially desirable, that the employment given should be something added to the stock of labour, demanding the services of the poor, and not a portion taken from some to be given to others. Hence, if the work hitherto done in families, whose circumstances are easy, should hereafter be done through the Society, its design will be most effectually promoted. Hence too the importance of devising new modes of employment, of introducing arts and fabrics which before have been unknown or little used among us. Every such addition enables some one to provide more easily for himself or his family.'

To those who have such views, and who are willing to devote their time and attention to such objects, we most cordially wish success; and we view as a pledge of success the happy union of ardour and prudence, which has marked the commence

ment of the institution. It has been begun and is principally supported by individuals of that sex, one of whose distinguishing excellences is a 'charity which never faileth.'

is

They may be encouraged to perseverance, we think, by the result of the many and laboured investigations into the causes of pauperism and the means of its relief which have been made in England. All that has been ascertained there tends to show, that the surest and best mode of giving assistance to the poor, to afford them the materials and the inducement to labour; and we are happy to perceive, that the attention of our own legislature has been directed to this important subject, by an able and judicious report made, during the session of this winter, by the present speaker of the House of Representatives. This report, with the accompanying documents, abundantly confirms the conclusion which we cannot but regard as established; and we recommend the perusal of it to those who have any doubts as to the expediency or the practicability of giving employment to the poor.

The ladies who have instituted this society for the purpose, may justly boast of having acted upon a principle which is now sanctioned by legislative wisdom, and we do not feel it necessary for us to exhort those to perseverance, who seem to have so well considered what they were undertaking. We would only do what in us lies, to urge and excite many to follow the admirable example which a few have given. We understand that the funds of the society are yet inadequate to the accomplishing of all that the benevolent projectors are desirous of performing, and we should be much gratified to observe a few more names of those of our own sex on the list of subscribers. We think they will rarely find a better opportunity for charity; and we would remind all, both the wise and simple, the prudent and the undiscerning, that he who giveth to the poor, lendeth to the Lord."

INTELLIGENCE.

[We have received the following communication from a member of the Rev. Mr. Peabody's Society at Springfield, relating to a sort of excommunication of his church by their brethren of the first church in that place; according to the advice of an ecclesiastical council. Viewed merely in relation to those who are the

objects of this vote of the first church, the affair appears to be of a character to be laughed at and forgotten. But it has another aspect. Nothing subjects men to more contempt than the impotent expressions of ill will having its origin in any unworthy feelings. If any portion of the clergy will be engaged in transactions of this sort, that portion of the clergy cannot hope to retain the respect of the community. They are bringing disgrace upon themselves ;-and that any of the ministers of religion should disgrace themselves, we do not think a slight evil. But, what is far worse, they expose religion itself to contempt; for men are too ready to believe, that what is done by its professors, and especially what is done in its name, is conformable to its spirit. It is therefore because we wish the clergy to be respectable, and religion to be respected, that we view the transaction at Springfield with somewhat different feelings from what it might otherwise excite.]

IN January 1809, the Rev. Samuel Osgood was with great unanimity ordained pastor of the first church and parish in Springfield. Soon after his ordination, he began to advance doctrines which many of his people considered unscriptural, and inconsistent with those he had avowed in public and private, while preaching on probation for settlement. In consequence of this and sundry other things, which I forbear to mention, there was in a few years, a strong and growing disaffection to Mr. Osgood in the parish. In June 1818, a petition was presented to the legislature, signed by a respectable number of the church and parish, to be incorporated into a separate society. The reason assigned was, that Mr. Osgood had changed his theological sentiments, and that they could not profit by his ministry. At a parish meeting however, in December 1818, the aggrieved, (for so I think they should be denominated) presented a memorial to the parish stating the reasons of their proceedings; and being very unwilling to separate from their brethren, desired the majority to unite with them in adopting measures for an amicable dismission of Mr. Osgood, and the settlement of another man, in whom they might all be united; but this was refused. The petitioners for a new society then requested an equitable division of the parish fund, which consisted of nine thousand dollars; but this was not granted. They then requested that as the parish were about to erect a new meeting-house, the old one might be sold to them at a fair price. This was also refused. An individual of their number then made a proposition to the other petitioners, that if they would provide a fund for the support of a Minister, he would build a meeting-house at his own