Now the question is: Is it not expedient for us to enter upon that work? I am met by the objection: “Why, you are doing the same work that the American Missionary Association is doing. Why have two societies, side by side, doing essentially the same work?” They are not doing the same work, in the fact that the subjects for which they labor are providentially made distinct. It is impossible in this generation, and in the generation to come, for the American Missionary Association to plant Congregational churches to any considerable extent through the South. Now, the plain and practical question is: Is it wise for us to neglect the present opportunity and, for the sake of what may be proved after all to be but sentiment, let the present moment pass, a moment so freighted with consequences to the future? Is it wise for us to insist upon the strength of ecclesiastical ties as sufficient to hold men together, whom we cannot counsel to come together by strength of natural ties? We cannot advise marriage among the races; why insist upon a kind of work that forces them together in ecclesiastical relationships to which they are equally unfamiliar and averse? _The Home Missionary._ NO CLASHING MUST BE ALLOWED. EDITORIAL IN ADVANCE. What the American Missionary Association has done, and is doing, is only the prophecy of what it is to do in the near future, if it is promptly sustained in its noble work. And while we are on this subject, we wish most emphatically to say: There is not to be, there _must_ not be, any clashing in the work between this society and the American Home Missionary Society. The American Missionary Association was organized for a specific work, broadly and definitely understood to be for the uplifting of the colored races on this continent. To that work they are pledged, for that money is given to them, and they are very wisely administering the trust committed to their hands. To criticise that society because it does not organize what are known as white churches is the height of folly, and for it to attempt to force mixed churches on the South would be equally absurd. The American Home Missionary Society should not go down South with the idea of starting white churches. It should be allowed, and must be allowed, to go there and organize churches just as it does in Iowa, Dakota, Missouri and Kansas, saying nothing at all about the race question or in any way excluding colored people from its membership; giving them that freedom which is theirs, to come in, and the freedom also to stay out, and to have their own churches, and their own social circles, just as they please. Any one who undertakes to force such things out of their natural and proper course will only work confusion and loss. NO TROUBLE NEED BE BORROWED. EDITORIAL IN CONGREGATIONALIST