{21} This statement may be set down as an exaggeration of the facts. It was, however suggested to the mind of the writer, by the perusal of a striking speech of the Rev. Dr. Campbell’s, at a recent meeting in Manchester, in aid of a Jubilee Fund for the Sunday School Union. In the course of his address, he adverted to “the terrible fact” that if the clergy of all denominations, and the city missionaries, with all their converts and adherents, were removed from the great metropolis, “the blank thereby created would not be very great.” He went on to say that “adult conversions” in London and England were “a rare thing,” and to describe the class as “sealed, unapproachable, unimpressible.” He proceeded in the following strain:—“Were you to multiply your ministers, both Church and Dissent, with real evangelical men, and to build edifices so that each thousand of our adult population should command for its service—if it choose to avail itself of it—such clergymen, or minister, it would very slightly alter the case . . . I have no hesitation in saying, that, unless some other agency than the public ministration of the Word is brought actively into operation, even if we had such an assemblage of gifts and talents concentred in our preachers as the world never saw, we could not do much.” His hope lay only in the influence of Sunday Schools upon the minds of the young. {22} The writer does not deem the tenour of the above arguments inconsistent with a belief in the fact that the major part of whatever good is _done_ in this world for elevating fallen humanity, socially or religiously, results from the self-denying efforts of pious men. While others _talk_ they _act_. They deserve all honour for what they accomplish, but have no claim, on that account, to be exempted from fair comment. These strictures will, no doubt, be set down to a censorious spirit, and not unlikely the writer will be denounced as an enemy in disguise. This, however, is the lot of all reformers and objectors to things as they are. _For its own sake_, irrespectively of the general principle, the Christian Church ought to value the right of free discussion. Honest criticism of a good cause, is much more to be desired than undiscriminating praise. It is a mournful fact, and _in itself_ a sure symptom of unhealthiness, that there is scarcely a religious magazine or newspaper which dare venture to give utterance to such sentiments as are contained in this pamphlet. The outcry raised against the candid expression of opinion has these, amongst others, injurious effects—it perpetuates corruption, it drives intelligent young men away from religious societies, and it furnishes unbelievers with a cogent argument against the Gospel. God grant that the Christian Church may put away this mischievous intolerance, and pursue their mission with a greater breadth of plan, wisdom of purpose, toleration of differences, and economy of means.