Another example of similar conduct has occurred since the change of ministry at home, which would, it might have been hoped, have infused a better feeling into the colonial authorities. At the end of 1841, the Bishop proposed to erect, in certain spots, small wooden churches, as the only means of obtaining churches at all; trusting, that after these had stood forty or fifty years, they might be replaced by buildings of a higher and more lasting character. The average cost of these humble little buildings was to be from 100_l._ to 120_l._; and they were intended for very poor districts; but since the outlay did not amount to 300_l._, the Government would give nothing, and no effort was made to introduce a modification of the law (supposing that to have been needful) in order to meet such cases. Instances to the same effect might easily be multiplied. In New South Wales land is comparatively cheap, and a horse is an indispensable necessary for a clergyman; but no part of the government grant is allowed to be spent in purchasing more than an acre for the site of a church, and half an acre for a house and garden. "To extend the latter allowance to any quantity of land from which an income might be derived, would increase the emoluments of the minister, at the public expense, beyond what the Act contemplates;" so the Bishop of Australia was assured by official authority in 1836. But enough of these miserable instances of state-peddling in ecclesiastical establishments. "There is no semblance," to use Mr. Gladstone's words, "in any part of these arrangements, of a true and sound conception of the conscientious functions of government in matters of religion."[218] May we venture to hope that the present ministry, of which the writer of the above is a distinguished member, may exhibit in their conduct and arrangements, both in the colonies and at home, a more sound and true conception of their duty than was ever shown by their predecessors? Such hopes, undoubtedly, are entertained by a portion of the British public, not unimportant either in numbers or in moral and political influence. Nevertheless, the zealously attached members of the Church of England need not to be reminded of a truth which is frequently brought before them in the circle of its daily service. They know that "it is better to trust in the Lord than to put any confidence in princes." They are sure that, if theirs is a living branch of Christ's Holy Catholic Church, many a weapon will be formed against it, but yet "no weapon that is formed against it shall prosper." [218] Gladstone's State in its Relations with the Church, chap. vii. p. 272.