important information respecting their recently departed friend and fellow labourer.

It will be easily seen that, as to both works, the principal source of information has been the same. The chief difference will be found to consist in the degree in which the two writers have been disposed to avail themselves of the information of which they were possessed; and to have arisen from the agreement or disagreement of their respective creeds with that of the distinguished individual whose principles and character they have both attempted to bring before the English reader.

The writer of this preface would earnestly deprecate the spirit of controversy; and yet, there is scarcely any thing of which he has a firmer conviction, than that a numerous and frequent attendance at prayer meetings is one of the most decisive evidences of religious prosperity.

In order to strengthen his objections to meetings of this kind, Mr. Gilly quotes from Bishop Heber, and from a letter by the highly venerated Thomas Scott. It may be doubted whether the late amiable ecclesiastical over

1 "Notice sur Felix Neff," published at Geneva in 1831.

seer in India was ever placed in such a situation as would enable him to form a just and adequate estimate of social meetings for prayer and mutual improvement in religious knowledge and experience. "In general," says Mr. Scott, "I am apt to think it very difficult for a minister in the Establishment to form and conduct prayer meetings in such a manner, as that the aggregate good shall not be counterbalanced or overbalanced by positive evil. But men of greater experience and capacity of judging have thought otherwise;" and then he ingenuously confesses, "but I am also, I fear, prejudiced, as the evils which arose from those at Olney induced such an association of ideas in my mind, as probably can never be dissolved."-Life of the Rev. T. Scott, pp. 518 and 519.

There cannot be a better illustration of the importance of prayer-meetings, than the consequences of repressing associations of this kind by the clergyman to whom this most unfortunate letter was addressed, when compared with the state of religion amongst the members of the Establishment

in the very next considerable town, where meetings for social worship have been continued, and where several private houses have for many years been licensed for that purpose.

There can be no doubt that Olney, at the time here alluded to, presented an extreme case, and such a one as could not, with any sort of justice or propriety, be taken as a fair specimen. Mr. Scott himself, speaking of social, in distinction from public worship, remarks, that it "tends greatly to maintain brotherly love."-Essay on Prayer.

Just as the preceding part of this preface had been written, a review of Mr. Gilly's work appeared in the "Quarterly," in which the writer expresses his full accordance with the work before him, as to the serious danger of prayer-meetings. How far the opinion of the reviewer is founded on actual observation or near contact, or whether so founded at all, is a matter left entirely to the reader's conjecture. However, it is highly probable that, in the estimation of a large majority of those persons by whom the following memorial was required, any

attempt to reply to the "Quarterly," respecting the danger or utility of prayer-meetings, would be a mere waste of time.

In urging attendance upon associations for mutual edification, Neff refers to 1 Cor. xii. 5-12. 22. 28;-xiv. 23, 24. 26, 27. 31, &c. To this reference Mr. Gilly objects. But is it not evident that meetings of this kind were held at Corinth? and equally so, that the apostle condemns nothing but certain abuses, and not the meetings themselves? Had social religious meetings for mutual improvement themselves been the object of his disapprobation, can we doubt but that the apostle would at once have interdicted them? and does not his very anxious solicitude to remove abuses obviously imply his high approbation of those meetings? It is true that these chapters relate chiefly to supernatural endowments; but still, this circumstance by no means touches the point at issue; for if the meetings themselves had been the object of his disapproval, surely he would have adopted no palliative, or half measure. He would have forbid the associations at once.

In the latter of these chapters, he says, "If therefore the whole church be come together into one place........ ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted." So far from interdicting these exercises, he says, "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy," only, "let all things be done decently, and in order."2

In speaking of the different religious parties in Switzerland and the North of France, an intelligent correspondent, to whom the writer of this volume is under very considerable obligations, divides them into three classes.

There is no reason to conclude that the term prophesy, as here used, relates to the foretelling of events. It refers to an exercise which has teaching, edification, and comfort for its object.

2 Although, in many cases, the want of spirituality may be assigned as the principal reason why prayer meetings are not better attended, may we not admit that, sometimes, at least, the indifference respecting them of which we cannot but complain arises, in some measure, from the manner in which, in this country, they are in general conducted? Are they not too formal-too much restricted, both as to the kind of exercise allowed, and the persons who usually engage? In short, are they not, without possessing the same circumstances of interest, too much like our more public and ordinary services?

*

A