But I hasten to a consideration of the latter part of Mr. Clarke's paper, which contains some extraordinary strictures on "revival meetings in England." He admits that the revival meetings in England may be well intended, but says, "They appear to have originated in a wish to imitate the Americans." I trust they originated in a sincere desire to glorify God, and to promote the salvation of immortal souls. Mr. C. says, "Religion cannot be imported." Indeed! Was not religion imported into this country? Was it not imported into America? And has it not been imported into other countries by our Missionaries? "Revival meetings," says Mr. C., "may do for America, but they will not do for England." How does he know they will not do for England? Has he ever made the attempt? Has he ever attended a revival meeting in England? If not, I think he ought to have been less hasty in his conclusion. But they will not do for England, "because the people here do not understand them, neither do they heartily approve them." I am not much surprised that people do not _heartily approve_ that which they do not _understand_. He says in America the meetings are "almost universally understood and recognized." Hence it appears where they _are_ understood they _are_ approved, and that they are _not_ approved only where they are _not_ understood. This surely cannot be a very powerful argument against such meetings. Another of Mr. C.'s reasons why these meetings will not do for England is, "Our country has long been inhabited, and distinguished for religious institutions." As to the length of time our country has been inhabited, that can have very little to do with the subject; and as to our being distinguished for religious institutions, I do not know that we have such a mighty advantage over the Americans. Some of our religious institutions, instead of diminishing, greatly increase our need of revival meetings. Mr. C. next attempts to draw from the Scriptures an argument against revival meetings. "Besides," says he, "it is said, 'Six days shalt thou labour,' and necessity makes many in England keep this commandment." And I should think necessity makes many in America keep it too. I suppose he does not mean to say that this commandment forbids persons from attending public worship on the "six days" if their circumstances will allow them to do so. And if he do not mean this, for what purpose can it be referred to? Once more. He says, "The unconverted inhabitants of this country are far more likely to raise bitter persecutions where revivals are attempted, than to feel willing to engage in them." And suppose the wicked were to raise bitter persecutions, are they to deter the Christian from doing that which he believes is for the glory of God? Has not the Saviour said, "Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, and persecute you," &c.? But experience has proved to me that Mr. C.'s assertion is far from correct; several