sons before his candidateship for the post of senior deacon; and therefore his having paid as gifts, and not as loans, the arrears of their rents to their landlords, through Mr, Chapman, "did look something like bribery," and was not to be got over very easily. But, still, if Mr. Chapman went awkwardly and clumsily to ask these persons now for their four notes of hand, they might be alarmed and refractory, and if this fact came to the ears of Tom Farmer, he would make the most of it for his clients, and urge it in writing, and verbally, to Mr. Chapman's detriment. What was to be done? It was difficult to decide.

"Why, suppose, Mr. Rawston," said the minister, "I should call on these four persons, and ask them whether they considered you had 'given❜or' lent' the money; inquire of them to whom they had spoken of your conduct, and in what terms; and then act accordingly?"

My grandfather thought that this was the wisest course, it being understood that if they said "lent," then that Mr. Chapman should obtain from them their promissory notes at a year after date, payable to Mr. Rawston, or his order; and if they said "given," then that

at

Mr. Chapman should take occasion to suggest that " none of them could hesitate to say the church-meeting that they had voted for Mr. Rawston from principle, and because they regarded him as the most suitable person."

"But if they will not say this?" asked Mr. Chapman.

“Why, then, tell them to stop away,” replied my grandfather-and on this point they were unanimous.

"There is now another subject, Mr. Rawston,” said the pastor in a dejected and anxious

tone.

“What is that, Mr. Chapman?"

"Why, the unfortunate protest I burnt. One of my grounds of accusation against George Palmer and the rest of them is, the sending me the protest after two decisions of the majority of the members in your favour, as an act on their part of impertinent and unwarrantable interference. But, now, I have no protest to produce and moreover, have recorded in the minute book that I have burnt it. I am afraid, Mr. Rawston, this will give great offence to some moderate members, especially when connected with your suppression of the Requisition of yesterday.”

"Not at all-not at all," said the senior deacon, with some warmth and impetuosity; "we either have a majority, or we have it not. If we HAVE a majority, it will vote FOR us: and if we have NOT a majority, we shall be defeated. That's the end of the matter."

"We may have a majority when we are right, Mr. Rawston, but not when we are wrong, and surely it is wise to look all our difficulties in the face, for now George Palmer has got into Tom Farmer's hands we shall be sure to have a law, if not a Chancery, suit."

"Well, Mr. Chapman, but the protest is burnt, isn't it?"

"Yes, certainly, Mr. Rawston, you saw me burn it."

"Then can we change our position in this respect, Mr. Chapman?"

'Certainly not; but what excuse or plea am I to make for this act?"

"None whatever, Mr. Chapman, except that contained in the minute book. Stand upon

your rights, if you have any, and try the question of the rights of an Independent minister.”

"That would be the most dangerous of all possible questions to try, Mr. Rawston, for the 'RIGHTS' of an Independent minister, as far as

property of Miss Timmings; and then that she, the said Miss Timmings, being a Presbyterian, had built a chapel or place of worship for the service of Almighty God, and had resolved on conveying it to Thomas Tompkins, &c., upon the trusts thereinafter mentioned."

Here my grandfather paused. "Being a Presbyterian, Mr. Chapman; what, was the founder of your chapel a Presbyterian?”

you

"Oh! yes, Mr. Rawston, to be sure she was; I thought you knew that. You know when called on Mr. Wells to ask him to be less communicative as to our concerns and trusts to strangers, and not to speak of our 'Presbyterian origin' in the presence of Mr. Mackenzie."

"Yes, yes, I remember that, Mr. Chapman; but I had no idea that the founder was a Presbyterian, and doubtless the deed Presbyterian too; but let us see."

So my grandfather read on as follows:-"To have and to hold the said lands and tenements, chapel, buildings, hereditaments, and premises, with their appurtenances, unto the said Thomas Tompkins, Stephen Prince, and William Figgins, their heirs and assigns, UPON THE TRUSTS FOLLOWING (that is to say):

"UPON TRUST, that the said chapel shall be appropriated for the solemn worship of Almighty God, according to the doctrines, discipline, and principles of the religious sect or body calling themselves Presbyterians."

"That's clear enough," said my grandfather; "Miss Timmings was a Presbyterian, and she founded a Presbyterian chapel; very natural and very pious: but how in the world has it happened that it is now an INDEPENDENT chapel?"

"Oh, Mr. Rawston, let not that surprise you. The principles of Dissent are not fixed and stationary, like those of the Church of England. Presbyterians to-day, Independents to-morrow, Baptists ten years hence—and, I am sorry to say, sometimes Socinians afterwards. I heard an old Independent minister once declare at the Wiltshire Association, 'that if all the chapel deeds of all the Independent meeting-houses in England should be examined, not one out of ten would be found to be strictly legal; but then,' said he, we are all dissenters; some think this, and others think that, but we all agree to oppose the Church, and whenever we are called upon to assist to pull down the successor of St. Peter, we give a