{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_40081/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_40081","id":"gutenberg_40081","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40081","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Biographies","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Chalmers, Thomas, 1780-1847","Famous Scots Series"],"text":"Produced by Al Haines.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: Cover]\n\n\n\n[Illustration: Title page]\n\n\n\n\n                                 THOMAS\n                                CHALMERS\n\n\n                                   BY\n\n                               W. GARDEN\n                                BLAIKIE\n\n\n\n                                 FAMOUS\n                                 SCOTS\n                                 SERIES\n\n\n\n                              PUBLISHED BY\n                           OLIPHANT ANDERSON\n                          FERRIER -- EDINBURGH\n                               AND LONDON\n\n\n\n\n                   The designs and ornaments of this\n                    volume are by Mr. Joseph Brown,\n                   and the printing from the press of\n                Messrs. T. and A. Constable, Edinburgh.\n\n\n\n\n                                PREFACE\n\nI cannot send forth this little sketch of the Life of Chalmers without\nexpressing anew my admiration of the four-volumed biography by my late\nbeloved friend, Dr. Hanna.  It is not only admirable as a portrait, but\nit cannot be read by any sympathetic reader without a sense of\nhumiliation, and without a great stimulus to higher things.  It is much\nto be regretted that Dr. Hanna was unable to carry out the purpose which\nit is understood that he cherished, of condensing the work into a single\nvolume.\n\nOther memorials of Dr. Chalmers have been given to the world.  Among\nthese may be noted:--\n\n1. A Biographical Notice of the late Thos. Chalmers, D.D., LL.D.  Read\nbefore the Royal Society of Edinburgh.  By the Very Rev. E. B. Ramsay,\nM.A., 1850.\n\n2. Chalmeriana; or Colloquies with Dr. Chalmers.  By Joseph John Gurney,\n1853.\n\n3. A Selection from the Correspondence of Thos. Chalmers, D.D., LL.D.\nEdited by Rev. W. Hanna, LL.D., 1853.\n\n4. Mr. Isaac Taylor's elaborate articles in the _North British Review_,\n1852 and 1856.\n\n5. Thomas Chalmers, a Biographical Study.  By James Dodds, 1879.\n\n6. Thomas Chalmers.  His Life and its Lessons.  By Rev. Norman L.\nWalker, 1880.\n\n7. Thomas Chalmers, D.D., LL.D.  (Men Worth Remembering). By Donald\nFraser, D.D., 1881.\n\n8. Thomas Chalmers, Preacher, Philosopher, and Statesman. By Mrs.\nOliphant, 1893.\n\n9. Recollections of Dr. Chalmers by Professor David Masson, in _Lowe's\nand Macmillan's Magazines_.\n\n  10. Recollections by the Rev. Dr. Macaulay in the _Leisure Hour_.\n\n11. Funeral Sermons and Lectures by Rev. Dr. Cunningham, Rev. Dr. Jas.\nBuchanan, Rev. John Bruce, Rev. W. K. Tweedie, Rev. John G. Lorimer,\nRev. James Julius Wood, Rev. J. A. Wallace, Rev. John Gemmel, Rev. David\nCouper, Rev. W. Tasker, Rev. A. J. Ross, Rev. Dr. W. Lindsay Alexander,\nRev. Dr. Sprague (Albany, New York), Rev. Dr. Sharp (Boston), Rev.\nProfessor Edwards (Andover), Rev. Dr. Smyth (Charleston), etc. etc.\n\nAmong the greatest privileges and honours of his life, the writer will\never regard his having been for one session a student under Dr. Chalmers\nat Edinburgh; for three years a co-presbyter and cordial fellow-worker\non his lines, in forming and building up a territorial congregation; and\nfor many years the occupant of one of two chairs of theology which were\nconstituted at the Disruption in New College, in place of the single\nchair which Dr. Chalmers had held, and thus in a sense, but most\nunworthily, one of his successors.\n\n\nEDINBURGH, _December_ 1896.\n\n\n\n\n                                CONTENTS\n\n\n                               CHAPTER I\n\nBIRTH, SCHOOL, AND COLLEGE, 1780-1803\n\n\n                               CHAPTER II\n\nKILMANY, 1803-1815\n\n\n                              CHAPTER III\n\nGLASGOW, 1815-1823\n\n\n                               CHAPTER IV\n\nST. ANDREWS UNIVERSITY, 1823-1828\n\n\n                               CHAPTER V\n\nEDINBURGH UNIVERSITY, 1828-1843\n\n\n                               CHAPTER VI\n\nNEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH, 1843-1847\n\n\n\n\n                            THOMAS CHALMERS\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER I\n\n                       BIRTH, SCHOOL, AND COLLEGE\n\n                               1780-1803\n\n\nThomas Chalmers was born at Anstruther, Fifeshire, on the 17th March\n1780, when the flowers were appearing on the earth, and the time of the\nsinging of birds was come. It seems never to have been noticed that this\nwas St. Patrick's day, and no one has ever instituted a comparison\nbetween the lives of the two illustrious Scotsmen.  But if only we had\nauthentic materials for the life of Patrick, whose Scottish birth seems\nwell established, it would probably be found that there was no slight\nsimilarity. Transferring his labours to Ireland, Patrick, with the\nGospel of Jesus Christ as his instrument, laboured for the double object\nof bringing individuals within the Kingdom of God, and elevating and\npurifying the condition of the country. The same double aim was ever\npresent to the mind of Chalmers.  On the basis of the Gospel, he could\nnot separate the social from the personal, the general from the\nparticular, the temporal from the spiritual.  He had always an Arcadia,\na Utopia, a new spring-tide for his country in his vista; but a\nspring-tide to be realised in one way only--by the coming of the Spirit\nfrom on high.\n\nAnstruther was not a stirring town, for through the union with England\nit had lost no little of the trade, whether legal or contraband, which\nin former days, along with the other little towns on the Fife seaboard,\nit had carried on with France and England.  But an abundant element of\nlife and activity was supplied within his father's house, where nine\nbrothers and five sisters, among whom Thomas came fifth, must have\nsufficed to make any household lively.  The father was in fairly\nprosperous business, and provost of the town.  He is described as\n'dignified and handsome in appearance, highly honourable, courteous, and\nkind; and of fervent but not ostentatious piety.'  The mother was in\nperson short, thick, erect, devoted to her household, sharing her\nhusband's piety, but so self-restrained that a smile was seldom seen on\nher face.  The family was connected with many members of the\nmiddle-class, some also of the clergy, and a sprinkling of the landed\ngentry.\n\nThe parish school of Anstruther, to which Chalmers, persecuted by a\nscolding nurse, went at the age of three, was taught by a master never\nvery efficient, and in Chalmers's time old and nearly blind, who made up\nfor other deficiencies by his great energy in flogging.  There was an\nassistant teacher who was not much more effective in teaching than his\nprincipal, but who was as mild as the other was severe.  This gentleman,\nwho survived Chalmers, bore a very touching testimony to his kindness.\n'No man,' he exclaimed on one occasion, 'knows the amount of kindness\nwhich I have received from him.  He has often done me good both as\nrespects my soul and my body; many a pithy sentence he uttered when he\nthrew himself in my way; many a pound note has he given me; and he\nalways did the thing as if he were afraid that any person should see\nhim.'  Of Chalmers as a schoolboy the testimony is that he was 'one of\nthe idlest, strongest, merriest, and most generous-hearted boys in\nAnstruther school.'  Had one chanced to come upon the school-children\nengaged in their various amusements (says one of his biographers), one\nshould soon have distinguished 'one boy above the rest, seeming about\nten or twelve years of age, who is the leader in their sports--strong,\nactive, merry, and boisterous, with big head, matted dark hair, large\nplain features, broad shoulders, well-proportioned but brawny limbs, his\nlaugh always loudest, and his figure always foremost at football and the\nother games in which they are contending.'[1]\n\n  [1] _Thomas Chalmers: A Biographical Study_.  By James Dodds.\n\nThe father and mother of Dr. Chalmers, as we have said, were of strong\nreligious character, hearty followers of the Calvinistic theology, and,\nthough too busy to bestow much attention on the education of their\nfamily, very desirous that they should all accept their views.  Much\nthough Chalmers respected and honoured them, he did not at first fall in\nwith their views of life and duty.  He grew up with a positive dislike\nboth of the Calvinistic theology and the evangelical life.  It was not\ntill after he had been some years in the ministry that, under the acute\npressure of personal illness and family bereavements, he came to see as\nthey did, and to live as they lived.  The change to them must have been\nlike the conversion of Augustine to Monica.  And yet, in after years,\ntheir intercourse was not wholly without friction. It is touching to\nmark in the son's diary tokens of his humiliation on account of the\ncrossness with which he sometimes spoke to them.  Both were deaf, and an\naunt who lived with them was deafer still, and it annoyed Thomas, with\nhis naturally impatient temper, to find himself misapprehended, often to\nhave to repeat his remarks, and always to speak in that louder tone\nwhich the deaf require.  We may be sure that when he felt and confessed\nthus in secret, he would try to make up for it at other times by double\nkindness, for of all things that could vex him, to inflict needless pain\nwas about the worst.  His respect for them was alike sincere and\naffectionate; and for his mother's widow hood--lonely, but bright, calm,\nand holy, he had such a reverence that it became the very pattern of all\nthat he desired most earnestly for his own old age.\n\nThomas was not yet twelve, when, with his brother William, he was sent\non to the University of St. Andrews. At such an age, common enough then\nin Scotland, boys were incapable of grasping the great aims of a\nuniversity; and college to them was but an upper school.  But the change\nto the university had at first no effect in mending the idle ways of our\nstudent.  He was 'volatile, boyish, and idle.'  Yet, even from the\nfirst, he was noted for strict integrity and warm affection, and in all\nthat he did undertake he was enthusiastic and persevering.  It was not\ntill his third session that he became attached to any branch of\nlearning.  The science that captivated him then was mathematics.  And so\nardently did he devote himself to it, that long afterwards, about the\ntime when he left Kilmany, he was familiarly known as 'Mr. Chalmers, the\nmathematician.' He might have borne the designation to the very end.\nHis mind was fashioned on the mathematical model, taking its stand on\nrealities, the substantial verities of life; striving to explain their\nrelations and applications, and then pressing them with tremendous\nenergy on the hearts and consciences of his fellows.  For Professor\nBrown, his mathematical teacher, he retained through life the warmest\nregard; and when he died in 1836, he wrote to his widow, that of all his\npublic instructors he was the one that impressed him most, and to whom\nhe owed most in the formation of his tastes and habits, and in the\nguidance of his literary life.\n\nAs the termination of his curriculum in arts drew near, it became\nnecessary that he should choose a profession. Strange to say, although\nhe had no favour either for theology or religion, he had declared from\nhis boyhood for the ministry.  Some of the more picturesque sayings of\nthe Bible had taken a remarkable hold of his mind.  When but three years\nold, being missed and sought for, after it had become dark, he was found\nalone, pacing up and down in the nursery, repeating to himself the words\nof David, 'O my son Absalom, my son Absalom; O Absalom, my son, my son!'\nThe sister of one of his schoolfellows used to tell of her breaking in\non the two, and finding him on a chair, preaching vigorously to his\nsingle hearer.  It was the soul of the orator asserting itself from the\nvery first.\n\nBut when he entered on his theological course, there seemed to be little\nor no development of the real spirit of the ministry.  He was, indeed,\nfull of reverence for truth, and so impatient of anything like double\ndealing, that when his professor represented that certain doctrines of\nCalvinism should not be much spoken of, he could not but ask, Why not,\nif they be true?  Throughout his whole life he disliked men who were not\nabove board with everything, and his own regard for truth was\ntransparent to all.  For a time his mind was clouded with scepticism.\nThe books that were most useful in restoring his faith were Butler's\n_Analogy_ and Beattie's _Essay on Truth_.  A very remarkable effect was\nproduced on him when, some time after, he became acquainted with\nJonathan Edwards on _The Freedom of the Will_.  For a time he could\nneither think nor talk of anything else.  What so impressed him was the\nidea of the whole series of events in the spiritual as well as the\nmaterial world being bound together by unalterable links, and thus\nforming one vast scheme--a wonderful tribute to the wisdom, power, and\nglory of God.  The incident showed how his mind had expanded, and how he\nhad come to find delight in large, comprehensive views of things.  Long\nafter, he spoke of the year in which this subject occupied him as a time\nof mental elysium, so great was his delight.  Yet at this time\nevangelical truth was positively rejected.  We are reminded of the\nexperience of another, afterwards a colleague of his own in New College,\nEdinburgh, the late Dr. John Duncan, who, even when a student of\ndivinity, wandered for a time in the gloomy mazes of atheism, but when\nbrought into the light of theism--apart from Christianity\naltogether--expressed his emotion in a way of his own: 'I danced on the\nbrig o' Dee when I came to see there was a God.'\n\nIt was of course necessary, when he had advanced somewhat in his\ndivinity course, that he should practise the art of composition.  His\nfirst efforts, we are told, were poor enough.  The composition both of\nhis letters and his college exercises was bald, unrelieved by any gleam\nof fancy or sentiment.  But in two years he had learned to write with\nease and fluency, and he had formed that remarkable, if somewhat turgid\nstyle which he practised ever after.  We know so little of the English\nwriters who engaged his attention at this time that the natural history\nof his style is something of a puzzle.  It has somewhat of the swell and\ndignity of Johnson, and much of the diffuseness of Burke--two of the\nmost prominent writers in his youth.  But its main quality must have\narisen from the burning fervour of his own mind, and the natural outflow\nof his thoughts, shaping his language spontaneously, and moulding it\ninto characteristic forms of beauty and power.\n\nWhen in 1842, on the eve of the Disruption, Chalmers met four or five\nhundred of his brethren in what was known as the Convocation, and\nendeavoured to reconcile them to the prospect of an unendowed church,\nthe task was one that demanded the highest efforts of his eloquence.  It\nwas his aim to rouse them to an attitude worthy of the occasion, and,\nwith that view, he concluded an appeal of transcendent power with a\neulogy of enthusiasm which awakened thunders of applause.  Never had he\nseemed more eloquent. Yet the passage that had so thrilled his audience\nwas found after his death to be an exact transcript from one of his\nstudent discourses.  'Enthusiasm is a virtue rarely produced in a state\nof calm and unruffled repose.  It flourishes in adversity.  It kindles\nin the hour of danger and rises to deeds of renown.  The terrors of\npersecution only serve to awaken the energy of its purposes.  It swells\nin the pride of integrity, and great in the purity of its cause, it can\nscatter defiance amid a host of enemies.'--Already, '_fervet,\nimmensusque ruit_.'\n\nIn those days it was the practice of the members of the university to\nmeet morning and evening in the public hall for worship, the prayers\nbeing led by the students of divinity.  In his first theological\nsession, Mr. Chalmers's prayer was an amplification of the Lord's\nPrayer, so eloquent and original as to awaken the wonder of all.  One\nwho remembered his prayers on these occasions said: 'The wonderful flow\nof eloquent, vivid, ardent description of the attributes and works of\nGod, and still more, perhaps, the astonishingly harrowing delineation of\nthe miseries, the horrid cruelties, immoralities, and abominations\ninseparable from war, which always came in more or less in connection\nwith the bloody warfare in which we were engaged with France, called\nforth the wonderment of his hearers.  He was then only sixteen years of\nage, yet he showed a taste and capacity for composition of the most\nglowing and eloquent kind. Even then his style was very much the same as\nat the period when he attracted so much notice, and made such powerful\nimpression in the pulpit and by the press.'\n\nThus already, in his student days, that great outline of character had\nbegun to shape itself, which, modified afterwards by new and powerful\nforces, made him the great man he was.  The intensity of his nature, the\nredundant energy that hardly knew fatigue, the largeness of his view,\nthe warmth of his affection, the independence of his judgment, and the\ngushing impetuosity of his style were manifest from these college days.\nWhatever he may have derived from his parents, or from the masters that\ntaught him, or the books he read, a fearless, sturdy independence was\nthe ruling feature--he was a genuine Scot.\n\n\nOn finishing his theological studies he accepted a situation as tutor in\na family, under the feeling that, as his knowledge of mankind had\nhitherto been limited to his own family and his fellow-students, it was\ndesirable for him to know a little more of the world.  But his\nexperience was not happy. It was not merely that his hours of teaching\nwere so arranged as to leave him hardly any time for reading, but that\nhis treatment was not what he considered due to a gentleman.  Of such\ntreatment he was sensitive to the last degree, nor was he restrained by\nany bashfulness or timidity from expressing his opinion of it.  His\nemployer wished to throw the blame on himself, and told him he had too\nmuch pride.  He could not deny the charge, but showed a ready wit in\nhurling it back on his accuser.  'Sir,' was his undaunted reply, 'there\nare two kinds of pride: there is the pride which lords it over\ninferiors, and there is the pride which rejoices in repressing the\ninsolence of superiors. The first I have none of--the second I glory\nin.'  This, to say the least, was tolerably smart for a lad of eighteen.\nBut it showed not only his independence but his intolerance of\nopposition.  Soon after, he gave up the situation.\n\nHe had not completed his nineteenth year when he applied to his\npresbytery to be licensed as a probationer.  He was under the legal age,\nbut probably his precocity had made a considerable impression, for the\nlaw was evaded under a traditional exception in favour of youths 'of\npregnant parts,' and on the 21st July 1799 he became a licentiate.  But\nhe did not show much interest in the work of his new calling.\nImmediately after, he paid a visit to friends in England, in the course\nof which he preached his first sermon, at Wigan, on 25th August 1799.\nHis eldest brother wrote to his father: 'His mode of delivery is\nexpressive, his language beautiful, and his arguments very forcible and\nstrong....  It is the opinion of those who pretend to be judges that he\nwill shine in the pulpit, but as yet he is rather awkward in his\nappearance.  We, however, are at some pains in adjusting his dress,\nmanner, etc., but he does not seem to pay any great regard to it\nhimself. His mathematical studies appear to occupy more of his time than\nhis religious.'\n\nReturning from England, he spent the next two winters at Edinburgh\nattending classes at the university.  Mathematics, chemistry, natural\nand moral philosophy, and political economy were the subjects that\noccupied his attention. To Dr. Robison, Professor of Natural Philosophy,\nhe felt himself under very deep obligations.  He had been perplexed by\nthe views which he found in the _Systeme de la Nature_, published under\nthe pseudonym of Mirabeau, but really the work of the Baron von Holbach.\nThat rigid uniformity of natural law which it enforced seemed to point\nominously to materialism and atheism.  Under Professor Robison's\ninstructions he was led to ponder the remarkable harmony between the\nhuman mind and the processes of nature--the wonderful adaptation of the\none to the other; and the conclusion was irresistible that this must be\ndue to an intelligent Divine Being who had framed these adaptations. In\nafter years this was the theme of his Bridgewater treatise, and it was\none of the corner-stones of his Natural Theology.  As to preaching\nduring these Edinburgh studies, it seems to have been almost entirely\nneglected.\n\nA new situation, however, opened up to him, as assistant to the Rev. Mr.\nElliot, minister of Cavers, in Roxburghshire. The duties of this office\nhe discharged for about a year with fair regularity and diligence, but\nwithout hard work, and without his showing any lively interest in the\nobjects of the ministry.  In the course of his residence there, he\nlearned that when the parish of Kilmany, in Fife, should fall vacant (as\nit was likely to do, but not just immediately, by the appointment of the\nincumbent to a chair), he would get the presentation from the University\nof St. Andrews.\n\nBut what interested him much more was his appointment as assistant, for\nthe ensuing session, to the professor of mathematics there.  All that\nconcerned the ministry excited but a languid interest, but his literary\nand scientific ambition was irrepressible.  Already it had begun to look\ntowards a mathematical chair.  As Mrs. Oliphant remarks, 'The life and\nenergy of a robust young man, full of ambition, eager for achievement,\nwas in all his veins.'  As a teacher he kindled the enthusiasm of his\nstudents for mathematical science.  To himself the demonstrations of\ngeometry were alike complete and beautiful.  But he had also a way of\nassociating mathematics with other pursuits, of bringing all manner of\nside-lights to bear on the study, of finding analogies in this quarter\nand in that, that greatly increased his popularity as a teacher.  As one\nof his students remarked afterwards, 'Under his extraordinary management\nthe study of mathematics was felt to be hardly less a play of the fancy\nthan a labour of the intellect--the lessons of the day being continually\ninterspersed with applications and illustrations of the most lively\nnature, so that he secured in a singular manner the confidence and\nattachment of his pupils.'\n\nBut such popularity among the students was apt to beget a different\nfeeling among the professors; it especially roused Mr. Vilant, the\ngentleman as whose substitute Chalmers had been acting.  Mr. Vilant, it\nappeared, had been granting certificates without communication with his\nassistant--a grievous offence in his eyes.  Accordingly, at the public\nexamination of his classes at the end of the session, Chalmers broke out\ninto a severe invective against him, and delivered a long, sarcastic\nspeech in condemnation of his conduct.  The professors knew not how to\nlook, but at last the Principal brought the speech of Chalmers to an\nend, and he proceeded with his examination as if nothing had happened.\n\nHis capacity of combining strong feeling in one direction with perfect\nself-control in every other was very remarkable. Many years afterwards,\nwhen expressing his views with extraordinary energy in the General\nAssembly on the question that led to the Disruption, he was interrupted\nby a layman, who remarked that they were all pleased to hear him,\nexcited though he was, but that there were limits, etc., etc.\n'Excited!' exclaimed Chalmers, in great astonishment; 'does the\ngentleman say that I am excited?  I am as cool as an algebraic problem.'\nHis head was in no degree disturbed by the vehemence of his heart.\n\nA short time had to elapse between the close of the session and his\nordination as minister of Kilmany, which Mr. Chalmers devoted to a visit\nto Edinburgh.  His father was disappointed and mortified that on the eve\nof entering on so solemn a profession, he did not put the interval to\nuse at home in the way of earnest meditation and prayer.  For that,\nhowever, the son did not see the slightest necessity.  He deemed himself\nalready sufficiently prepared for his duties, with the nature of which\nhe was well acquainted.  In this strain he wrote to his father, adhering\nto his plan.  A few years later he would have felt most differently,\nand, ashamed of his carelessness, he would have most cordially fallen in\nwith all that his father had written.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER II\n\n                                KILMANY\n\n                               1803-1815\n\n\nOn the 12th day of May 1803, Mr. Chalmers was ordained by the Presbytery\nof Cupar to the ministry of Kilmany. Never did the settlement of a young\nman of twenty-three create less interest in the mind of the person\nprincipally concerned.  There is no evidence either of that elation of\nfeeling which a young man naturally has in taking possession of a church\nand manse, and filling an important place in a community; or of that\noverwhelming sense of responsibility which so solemn a charge excites in\na serious mind. It was not the ministry but mathematics that held the\nfirst place in his heart.  Notwithstanding his settlement as minister of\nKilmany, he was bent on being re-appointed to the mathematical\nassistantship during the ensuing winter. His predecessor in that office\nhad been minister of a parish for six out of the eleven years when he\nhad held it; what reasonable objection could there be to his holding it\nfor a single session?\n\nAfter what had happened at the end of last session, it was no great\nwonder that his employer should inform him that his services were no\nlonger needed.  This could hardly have been a surprise, though it was a\ndisappointment; but when it was indicated that inefficiency was the\ncause of his dismissal, it was viewed as an intolerable insult.\nInefficiency, forsooth!  If he should submit to that, it would be a\ndeathblow to all his hopes of literary and scientific advancement, and\nit would shut him out for ever from all hope of a university chair.\n\nUnabashed by the treatment of the professors, he resolved to defy them,\nand to open classes on his own account during the ensuing session.  He\nwas too self-confident and self-reliant to care what might be said of\nhim, either by the professors or the public; but there was one quarter\nin which he was desirous to conciliate approval, or at least to prevent\ncondemnation.  He found it necessary to give reasons to his father for\nnot confining himself to the duties of his ministerial charge.  The\nchief reason was, that, apart from preaching, the duties were slight and\neasy, and it was his intention, while spending the week in St. Andrews,\nto return to Kilmany on Saturdays for Sunday duties, while two of his\nneighbours were willing to attend to any urgent week-day matters that\nmight arise.  The truth is, he had by a kind of unconscious instinct\naccepted the views of the 'Moderates,'--a school, in the language of Mr.\nDodds, 'which was neither true Christian nor good pagan; had neither the\nunction of Knox nor the yearning desire for truth and goodness of an\nEpictetus or a Cicero.'\n\nWhen he began his classes at St. Andrews, he of course had to encounter\nmany hard sayings and much opposition. But he was confident of his\nintegrity in thus repelling practically an injurious charge; and with no\nlittle dignity and force maintained that he was bound to take this step\nin order to uphold his reputation as a teacher.  And such was his\nsimplicity and geniality of manner that he felt no embarrassment in\ngoing about among the very professors and others who had condemned him\nmost.  After a few weeks, in addition to his three classes of\nmathematics, he announced his intention of opening a class of chemistry.\nThis created a fresh storm of opposition.  But the class prospered, it\nwas conducted with the greatest enthusiasm, and the very fact of so\nyoung a man braving the opposition of the whole university in order to\ndefend his reputation gave a chivalrous aspect to the proceeding, which\ntoned down the current of opposition.  By the end of the session he and\nthe professors were all on good terms.  It was a marvellous proof of his\nenergy alike of mind and body that he was able to do all his academic\nwork, and at the same time write sermons and deliver them at Kilmany,\nwithout breaking down, without even the appearance of exhaustion.  On\nthe 14th March, after five months of this labour, he wrote to his\nfather, 'My hands are full of business.  I am living just now the life I\nseem to be formed for--a life of constant and unremitting activity.'  Of\nthe whole forty-three years that formed the remainder of his life,\nnearly the same thing might have been said.\n\nThe mathematical classes were not repeated in the following session, but\nthe chemical lectures were resumed, and carried on twice a week with\nincreased enthusiasm.  The lectures were subsequently repeated at\nKilmany and at Cupar. Once, when at a loss for means to assist a friend\nat Kirkcaldy, who had been associated with him in the volunteer service,\nthe chemical lectures were trotted out to the rescue. It was necessary,\nwhen he went to a town, to carry materials for experimenting with him,\nand Dr. Hanna tells how on one occasion one of the bottles that hung\nfrom his saddlebag having been broken, the contents were discharged on\nthe flank of his horse, where they left a discoloured belt to tell the\ntale.  Of this accident the present writer remembers to have heard a\nmore detailed version, according to which the accident to the bottle,\nwhich contained sulphuric acid, was not discovered till he was in the\nclass-room.  The moment it was perceived, Chalmers, in great excitement,\nexclaimed, 'Oh, my poor beast!' and rushed from the lecture-room to the\nstable to do whatever was possible to relieve the sufferings of the\nunfortunate animal.\n\nIt did not escape the notice of the Presbytery that the minister of\nKilmany was so much occupied with work outside his parish.  But the\nstandard of ministerial activity was low, and Chalmers had not much\ndifficulty in defending himself.  In a very short time his thoughts were\nagain turned to the university, but in another connection.  The chair of\nnatural philosophy became vacant, and he entered the lists as a\ncandidate.  But as the election was in the hands of the professors, he\ncould not have seriously dreamt of success.  Nor was he much concerned\nfor his failure. 'My contempt,' he wrote, 'for the low, shuffling\nartifices of college politics supports and elevates my mind against the\nvexation of regret.'\n\nA few weeks later, in January 1805, the University of Edinburgh lost one\nof its most eminent professors--Dr. Robison, of whom mention has already\nbeen made.  Professor Playfair obtained his chair, leaving that of\nmathematics, which he had held before, to be filled up.  Chalmers was\nagain in the field, but no qualifications that he could appeal to were a\nmatch for those of the successful candidate--Mr. (afterwards Sir John)\nLeslie.  In the course of the contest he came for the first time before\nthe public as an author.  Among the candidates was the Rev. Dr.\nMacknight, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, in opposition to whom\nProfessor Playfair had written to the patrons, remonstrating against\nsuch a conjunction of offices.  Mr. Chalmers's pamphlet (which was\nanonymous) was entitled, _Observations on a passage in Mr. Playfair's\nLetter to the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, relative to the Mathematical\nPretensions of the Scottish Clergy_.  He had ceased to have any personal\ninterest in the case, and his whole object was to show that a Scottish\nclergyman might be abundantly qualified for the duties of a chair in\naddition to those of a parish. 'The author of this pamphlet,' he said,\n'can assert from what to him is the highest of all authority, the\nauthority of his own experience, that after the satisfactory discharge\nof his parish duties, a minister may enjoy five days in the week of\nuninterrupted leisure for the prosecution of any science in which his\ntaste may dispose him to engage.'  When the religious views of Mr.\nChalmers underwent the great change which will be described afterwards,\nhe was much distressed for this publication, and did his utmost to\nwithdraw it from circulation.  In a discussion on pluralities in the\nGeneral Assembly some years afterwards, he argued vehemently against\nboth the principle and practice of pluralities; and, being twitted with\nhaving at one time pronounced in their favour, he candidly admitted that\nhe had done so, but it was in the days of his spiritual blindness.  The\nchair involved was a chair of mathematics.  'What, sir,' he asked, 'are\nthe objects of mathematical science?  Magnitude and the relations of\nmagnitude.  But then, sir, I had forgot two magnitudes: I thought not of\nthe littleness of time; I recklessly thought not of the greatness of\neternity!'\n\nHowever imperfectly he might have been discharging the duties of his\nKilmany charge, Mr. Chalmers was exceedingly kind and exemplary to the\nmembers of his own family, one of whom, his sister Jane, for whom\nthrough life he had the warmest affection, kept house for him, while\nvarious others were more or less resident in his manse.  One brother,\nGeorge, a favourite of the family, spent some months at Kilmany in the\nautumn of 1806, in very touching circumstances. He was a sailor by\nprofession, and at the age of twenty-three commanded a merchant ship,\nwhich being attacked by a French privateer, gallantly drove off the\nenemy; but the skipper, lying down on deck, exhausted after the fight,\ncaught the seeds of consumption, which gradually prevailed against him.\nHis mother, three of his sisters, and two of his brothers were all\naround him at Kilmany, but no material improvement took place.\nReturning to Anstruther, George calmly awaited his coming end, with a\nfirm trust in the merit of his Saviour.  Every evening one of Newton's\n(of Olney) sermons was read at his bedside by one of the family in\nrotation.  It was one of the books which his brother had lately\ndenounced from the pulpit of Kilmany, as drawing men away from the\nwholesome teaching of the gospels.  Yet to his dying brother it brought\nheavenly comfort.  And evidently that brother enjoyed a secret something\nwhich he had not.  Could he be wrong?  Must there not be reality in the\nexperience that took away all fear of death, and made the youth of\ntwenty-three so willing to die?  'The deep impression made by George's\ndeath,' says Dr. Hanna, the chief biographer of Chalmers, 'was the first\nstep towards his own conversion.'\n\nLess than two years after, his sister Barbara, who was five years older\nthan himself, sickened and died.  The same fell disease which had cut\noff George proved fatal to her.  But her father could write of her that\nshe showed a cheerful submission to the will of God, and a humble\nconfidence in the satisfaction of her great Redeemer. Here was another\ncase of one very near and dear to him deriving all her support and\ncomfort in the hour of death from a source which he had been accustomed\nto associate with superstition and fanaticism.  Again the question could\nnot but force itself upon him, Must there not be something real in it,\nafter all?\n\nAs to the ordinary management of his household, being under the control\nof his sister, it proceeded in the ordinary fashion without much\ninterference from him.  He was easy, and easily pleased, but he was not\nan absent-minded dreamer.  At an early period his chemical studies had\nled him to believe that the time would come when coal-vapour would be\npurified and used for illuminating houses; and when he got a new manse,\nhe had pipes laid in it, in anticipation of this domestic use.  When\ncoffee was introduced as a beverage, he believed that in burnt rye he\nhad found a rival to it, and used to have it produced for his friends.\nOnce when it was proposed to subject the two substances to a sort of\ncompetitive trial, and a select company assembled to pass a verdict upon\nthem, a cup of genuine Mocha was first handed round and much approved\nof; then a second cup was presented, and being tasted was pronounced to\nbe much inferior; whereupon Mr. Chalmers burst into laughter and\nexclaimed, 'It's your own Mocha coffee, the second cup is just the same\narticle as the first!'  At another time, when some friends were to be at\ndinner, it turned out that the whole resources of the larder could\nproduce nothing but two kinds of dried fish.  Nothing daunted, Mr.\nChalmers had both of them properly served; and the covers being removed,\ncalled on his guests to make their choice.  'This, gentlemen, is salt\nfish from St. Andrews; and that is salt fish from Dundee.'  Of course he\nhad to be often on horseback; but as a horseman he did not excel.  'What\nmost provoked him was the frequency with which his horse threw him.  At\nfirst he was much interested in noting the intervals between each fall.\nTaking the average length, and calculating how far a dozen falls would\ncarry him, he resolved to keep the horse till the twelfth fall was\naccomplished.  Extremely fond of such numerical adjustments (a singular\nresult of the mathematical structure of his mind), he was most faithful\nin counting them.  In this instance, however, the tenth fall was so bad\nthat his resolution gave way, and he told his servant to take the horse\nto the next market and sell him forthwith.  'But remember,' he said,\n'you must conceal none of its faults; you must tell that it has thrown\nits master ten times.'  'But who,' asked the man, 'will think of buying\nthe horse if I tell him all that beforehand?'  'I cannot help that,'\nsaid Mr. Chalmers; 'I will have no deception practised, and if nobody\nwill buy the horse, you must just bring him back again.'  Nobody did buy\nthe horse; ultimately in return for a book he was transferred to his\nneighbour, Mr. Thomson of Balmerino, whom the animal served quietly and\nfaithfully for many a year, without showing any vicious tendency; whence\nit came to be surmised 'that the peculiarities of the case were not in\nthe animal but the restless and energetic horsemanship of the rider!'\n\nHis patriotism was intense, and not only did he fulminate against\nBonaparte in the pulpit, but he joined the volunteers, and held\ncommissions both as chaplain and lieutenant.\n\nThe early years at Kilmany passed with little change except a visit to\nEngland in the beginning of 1807.  These English visits, rare in those\ndays, enlarged his horizon, and showed him much that he did not find at\nhome.  At Liverpool he preached for a Mr. Kilpatrick, and we may gather\nthe character of his ordinary pulpit lessons from his two subjects--in\nthe forenoon on the comforts of religion; in the afternoon on\ndrunkenness.  His impression of Woodstock showed that intense admiration\nof nature which remained to the last: 'I spent two hours in the garden.\nNever spot more lovely--never scenes so fair and captivating.  I lost\nmyself in an elysium of delight, and wept with perfect rapture.'  At\nOxford there was kindled a reverence for English academical life and\nlearning which never left him.  'I was delighted with the academic air\nand costume of the place; and amid the grossness of a mercantile age, it\nis the delight of my spirit to recur to the quiet scenes of philosophy,\nand contemplate what our ancestors have done for learning, and the\nrespect that they once paid to it.'\n\nThree weeks were spent among the sights of London. He had a lively\ninterest in all he saw, especially in all that concerned science and the\nmechanical arts.  Among his old friends and neighbours were two sons of\nFifeshire manses, rising to that high distinction which he coveted in\nhis own department,--John Campbell, afterwards Lord Campbell, and Mr.\n(afterwards Sir David) Wilkie.  He was greatly interested in all he saw\nof royalty: Windsor, with all its glories; the chapel-royal there, where\nthe King and Queen and Princess Elizabeth seemed so simple, frank, and\ndevout; and he noted especially a view he had of these royal personages\nat St. James's, when her majesty returned his salutation with a\n'condescending notice.'  Not in the vulgar sense, but as useful and\nornamental elements in the social fabric, he had a high regard for\nroyalty and the nobility.  'I am charmed with the cordial and\naffectionate loyalty of the people.  I saw a glow of reverence and\nsatisfaction on every countenance, and my heart warmed within me.'\nSheridan was the great orator of the day, and oftener than once he heard\nhim speak.  He used to give two instances of Sheridan's readiness of\nrepartee when standing the fire of the hustings at Westminster. One\nelector complained that he was not satisfied with his treatment of the\nCarnatic.  'My dear sir,' he said, with a significant bow, 'the affairs\nof the Carnatic are in much abler hands.'  Another elector, with a very\nugly face, raised on the shoulder of the mob, said, 'If you do not alter\nyour ways, I will withdraw my countenance from you.'  'I am delighted to\nhear it,' said Sheridan, 'for it is the ugliest countenance I ever\nbeheld.'\n\nCambridge attracted him even more than Oxford: 'It smells of learning\nall over, and I breathe a fragrancy most congenial to me.'  As if he had\nforeseen Girton and Newnham, he said, 'The very women have an air of\nacademic mildness and simplicity.'  He preferred it to Oxford,\napparently because its objects of interest were not so concentrated, but\nreally, in all probability, because it was the great sanctuary of\nmathematical study.  'In Cambridge, everything wears a simplicity and\nchasteness allied to the character of philosophy, and the venerable name\nof Newton gives it an interest that can never die.'  The glories of York\nMinster entranced him.  Wherever he went he made careful observation\nalike of all that was beautiful and all that was instructive.  He\nreturned to Kilmany in July (1807), after an absence of nearly three\nmonths.\n\nImmediately after his return, Mr. Chalmers set himself to prepare for\nthe press a work of considerable size and research, entitled an _Inquiry\ninto the Extent and Stability of National Resources_.  Political economy\nhad always attracted him.  At the time of this publication, much fear\nwas expressed that the continued war with Bonaparte, implying the\nshutting against Britain of all the ports of the countries to which his\ninfluence extended, and the confiscation of all cargoes of British\ngoods, would exhaust the resources of the country and ruin its foreign\ntraders. Mr. Chalmers held strongly an opposite opinion.  Whether he\nsucceeded in proving his contention may be a question; certainly his\nposition was paradoxical.  But his sagacity, as the result has proved,\ncame out in more than one indirect form.  With reference to the\nincome-tax, he contended strongly that it ought not to be charged on the\nwhole of a man's income, but only on the part that remained after\nproviding for the necessaries of life.  It was only a few years ago that\neffect was given to this view in the case of small incomes. Another\nmatter for which he contended strongly was our obligation to provide a\nbetter living for our soldiers.  He denounced the compulsory system of\nenlistment--it ought to be a voluntary service.  And it ought to be a\nservice of limited duration; the nation had no right to make an\nexception against soldiers and sailors when all other servants were\nengaged for a limited number of months or years.  'Let it no longer be a\nslavery for life, and let the burning ignominy of corporal punishment be\ndone away.'  It was many years before these suggestions were acted on;\nChalmers lived to see his proposal of limited enlistment carried out,\nwhen a friend of his own (Lord Panmure, afterwards Earl of Dalhousie)\nwas Secretary at War.\n\nIn this and in later writings on political economy it has been well\nremarked that 'he bent the whole energies of his thought, not so much on\nits abstruser theories, as on those practical and vital problems which\ntend to meet the difficulties and ameliorate the condition of the\nworking classes.'  'He was the first political economist,' says Mr.\nDodds, 'who seized with a forethought and philanthropy equally before\nhis time upon _the condition-of-the-people question_, as the paramount,\nthe coming question of the age.'  His opinion as to the dynamic by which\nthe desired change was to come underwent a great change when his\nreligious views changed; at the present stage he hoped that the forces\nof reason would gradually effect the desired improvement; afterwards he\nsaw that these forces would be of little avail without the power of the\nGospel.\n\nBut a more important publication had now come into his horizon.  One of\nhis friends, Dr. (afterwards Sir David) Brewster, was at this time\nengaged in editing a voluminous work, the _Edinburgh Encyclopaedia_.\nChalmers was engaged to contribute several articles, chiefly on\nmathematical subjects.  After the death of his sister Barbara (in 1808)\nhe wrote to the editor requesting that the article on 'Christianity'\nshould be assigned to him.  Probably he felt, after what he had seen at\nthe two deathbeds in his family, that he needed to make this great\nsubject a matter of more careful study.  His own belief in the divine\norigin of Christianity had been firmly established long before--the\nhistorical evidence, as presented by Paley, and the analogical\nconfirmation of it by Butler appearing to him irresistible.  As it\nturned out, his article in the _Encyclopaedia_ bore mainly on the\nevidences; and the historical evidence received by far the most\nprominent place.  Indeed, he was disposed to lay little stress on what\nwas known as the internal evidence. This arose out of the fear he\nentertained lest men would substitute their own impressions of\nChristianity for the clear, authoritative declarations of God.  Since\nGod had uttered His voice, the sole and simple duty of men was to\nascertain what He had spoken, and give it their profound and absolute\nacceptance.  If they began to discuss the quality of His message, even\nthough its supreme excellence should be the point insisted on, they\nwould be bringing their own judgment into the case, and that might prove\na very dangerous element.  It needs hardly to be pointed out that in\nthis position Chalmers placed himself in antagonism to the current view\nof the friends of Christianity.  In point of fact, the internal evidence\nis that which carries conviction to the great mass of believers.  At the\npresent day, the character of Jesus Christ stands far the highest and\nmost impressive of all the evidences.  Chalmers was influenced, by a\nmental tendency which clung to him more or less all his life, to dwell\non one side of a truth, which, to be fully set forth, needed to be\nviewed in a variety of lights. But after a time he came to see that the\ninternal evidence deserved a higher place than he had assigned to it.\nWhen his article was expanded into his treatise on the _Evidences of\nChristianity_, the internal branch was duly acknowledged.\n\nBut before the article was finished, Chalmers, who was then in his\nthirtieth year, passed through the ordeal of a very severe illness,\nwhich confined him to his room for four months, prevented him from\nentering his pulpit for six months, and affected him more or less for a\nwhole year. He believed that he was about to die.  The whole subject of\nreligion assumed a new aspect of importance in his eyes. He came to see\nthat he had been living without God, and the discovery appalled him.\nThe will of God now became an imperative rule to him, and every energy\nwas bent towards bringing his own heart and life into conformity to it.\nIn such a man as Pascal the sublime transition had been made from the\nhighest walks of mathematical science to the still higher walk of faith.\nMight not he be able to realise what Pascal had achieved?  For a whole\nyear Chalmers laboured to effect this change.  His friends could not\nfail to mark the difference.  Brief but solemn allusions such as they\nhad never heard before would drop from his lips.  But in many respects\nhe was still the same.  'There were the same cordial greetings, the same\nkindly questionings about themselves and all their friends, and the same\nhearty laugh at the racy anecdote or stroke of quiet humour; for, great\nas was the change effected, neither at the first nor ever afterwards did\nit damp or narrow that genial and most social spirit which carried him\ninto varied intercourse with all classes of his fellow-men, and made the\njoy of that intercourse to be a very cordial to his heart.'  But, deeply\nsolemnised though he was, he had not attained the peace that passeth\nunderstanding, nor had he learned the precious act of free and loving\nfellowship with his Father in heaven.\n\nDuring all this time he was ever keeping a most vigilant eye on his\nhabits and life, and in a diary now begun we find him pulling himself up\nfor every little fault, every loss of temper, every bitter word, every\nconceited feeling.  And he is constantly praying for forgiveness and for\nstrength.  He is making progress in theological knowledge, finding, for\nexample, a far higher place in his regard for the atonement of Jesus\nChrist.  A very strong mark of his earnestness is seen in his\ndetermination finally to give up his mathematical reading, and devote\nhimself to theology.\n\nHis views came to a point after the reading of a book then in\nvogue--Wilberforce's _Practical View_.  Fifteen years after, he\ndescribed the effect which that book had upon him in a letter to a\nyounger brother.  'When I meet with an inquirer, who, under the impulse\nof a new feeling, has set himself in good earnest to the business of his\neternity, I have been very much in the habit of recommending\nWilberforce.  This perhaps is owing to the circumstance that I myself\nexperienced a very great transition of sentiment in consequence of\nreading his work.  The deep views he gives of the depravity of our\nnature, of our need of an atonement, of the great doctrine of acceptance\nthrough that atonement, of the sanctifying influences of the\nSpirit--these all give a new aspect to a man's religion....  But there\nare other books which might be as effectually instrumental in working\nthe desired change; and in defect of them all there is the Bible, whose\ndoctrines I well remember I then saw in an altogether new light, and\ncould feel a power and a preciousness in passages which I formerly read\nwith heedlessness, and even with disgust.'\n\nWe cannot dwell at more length on this most interesting struggle; enough\nto say that he emerged from it into the joy and peace of believing; he\nlaid hold of Jesus Christ as his only Saviour; entered into conscious\nreconciliation with God; looked habitually to the Holy Spirit for all\nsanctifying grace; and counted it his highest honour and delight to be a\nfellow-worker with God, especially in all that concerned the welfare of\nhis fellow-men.  Yet it was always observed of him that while cordially\nagreeing with evangelical divines in the great essentials of the faith,\nhe would accept of no position which did not commend itself to his own\nmind as according to Scripture.  For a class of men who insisted on very\nminute orthodoxies, and even questioned his own soundness because he\nmight not agree with them, he used to speak with little patience and\nless respect.\n\nThe change became very apparent in his ministerial work. He threw new\nardour into the visitation of his flock and the instruction of the\nyoung.  His preaching passed into those evangelical lines which formerly\nhe had treated with contempt.  Family worship, morning and evening, was\nregularly conducted in the manse, although sometimes it was a great\ntrial to introduce that much contemned practice when a guest was present\nwho had little sympathy with the evangelical life.  A Bible Society was\nestablished in the parish, and all the people were exhorted to join it.\nStrangers flocked to his church, not merely as of old to enjoy his\neloquent and impassioned delivery, but for guidance and aid in the\nservice of God.  Converts to living Christianity gladdened his heart and\naided him in his work.  'Sandy Paterson,' his first convert, became a\ngreat and earnest worker among his neighbours, and afterwards, as a city\nmissionary, in the Canongate of Edinburgh, successfully laboured in the\nslums.  With a young gentleman in Dundee, Mr. James Anderson, Chalmers\nformed a remarkable friendship on the basis of their mutual interest in\nreligion, and in his great humility corresponded with him more like a\nfellow-student or brother than a spiritual father.  And Chalmers himself\nbecame an earnest and laborious student of the Bible; and, in order to\nkeep up the glow of his spiritual life, instituted for himself a monthly\nexercise, in which he reviewed before God the work of the month, and\nwith much confession and thanksgiving, implored the blessing of God on\nall his work and on all his people.\n\nNo man was more sensible than himself of the great difference between\nhis earlier and later ministry.  He told his people that earnest though\nhe had been at first in pressing honour, truth, and integrity upon them,\nhe never once heard of any resulting reformation; all his vehemence had\nnot the weight of a feather on their moral habits.  It was only after he\nbecame acquainted with the true way of approach to God, and the real\nfountain of divine strength in Christ, that those minor reformations\nshowed themselves as the result of that deeper and more vital process by\nwhich the heart was changed.  It was his delight to hear masters\ntestifying to the scrupulous honesty and conscientious fidelity of their\nservants, after they had come under the power of the Gospel.  He prayed\nthat such servants, while thus adorning the doctrine of God their\nSaviour, humble though they were, might reclaim the great ones of the\nland to the acknowledgment of the faith.\n\nThough not much addicted to church courts, Chalmers, during his Kilmany\nministry, made a few memorable appearances in them.  His maiden speech\nin the General Assembly was delivered in 1809.  The subject was not an\ninspiring one; it related to a recent act of the legislature on the\naugmentation of stipends.  But his speech was a most logical and\nbrilliant performance.  The house was taken by storm.  'Who is he?' was\nthe question on every lip; 'he must be a most extraordinary person.'\nLater, in 1814, he spoke on a kindred subject--the repairs and\nalterations of manses.  A better chance for his powers occurred in the\nAssembly of that year in connection with a plurality case, where the\n'wonderful display of his talents' contributed much to the passing of an\nenactment that no professorship in a university should be held in\nconnection with a _country_ charge.\n\nDuring the latter part of his Kilmany ministry he became a contributor\nto the _Edinburgh Christian Instructor_, under the distinguished\neditorship of Dr. Andrew Thomson. One of his papers dealt with the\nnew-born science of geology, and greatly soothed the anxieties of many\ngood men, by pointing out that the first chapter of Genesis does not fix\nthe antiquity of the globe, but only that of the human race. To the\n_Eclectic Review_ he contributed an able paper on Moravian missions, in\nopposition to an ignorant and scandalous misstatement on that subject\nthat had appeared in the _Edinburgh Review_.  An eloquent pamphlet,\nlikewise in refutation of injurious statements, vindicated Bible\nSocieties from the charge of hurting the poor.  It was at this time, and\nin connection with this defence of Bible Societies, that he first\npublished those views of pauperism which he maintained so constantly all\nhis life.  At Kilmany there was no assessment for the poor, and very\nlittle pauperism.  It seemed to him far better to foster a spirit of\nindependence, thrift, and industry on the part of the poor, and a spirit\nof brotherly consideration on the part of the rich, than to confer a\nlegal claim on the one, and impose a legal obligation on the other.\n'What, after all,' asks the author of the pamphlet on Bible Societies,\n'is the best method of providing for the secular necessities of the\npoor? Is it by labouring to meet the necessity after it has occurred, or\nby labouring to establish a principle and a habit which would go far to\nprevent its existence? ... If you wish to extinguish poverty, combat\nwith it in its first elements.... The education and religious principle\nof Scotland have not annihilated pauperism, but they have restrained it\nto a degree that is almost incredible to our neighbours of the south.\nThe writer of this paper knows of a parish in Fife, the average\nmaintenance of whose poor is defrayed by L24 sterling a year, and of a\nparish of the same population in Somersetshire where the annual\nassessment amounts to L1300 sterling.'\n\nBut the most interesting feature in the pastoral development of Chalmers\nduring the latter part of his Kilmany ministry was the new direction\ngiven to his power as a pulpit orator.  We have seen that, from the\nbeginning, his more careful discourses were marked by great force of\nargument and beauty of expression, and that there was such a fervour in\nhis manner of delivery as approached to wild uncouthness.  Certain it is\nthat from first to last his pronunciation was very broad and his accent\nintensely provincial.  But when he struck into a vein of thought that\nwas full of interest to his own mind and soul, he was wonderfully\narrestive and impressive.  In his earlier years he evidently took but\nlittle trouble with his ordinary discourses; writing shorthand, he could\neasily throw off a sermon in two or three hours.  Yet even then he was\nat times singularly felicitous; and, for sheer eloquence, no sermon he\never preached was more remarkable than one delivered on occasion of the\nnational fast, on 8th February 1809, when, after a five-mile plodding on\nfoot through a heavy fall of snow, he convened the handful of people who\nhad reached the church in a room in the damp, uninhabited manse.  After\nhis change of views, his preparation for the pulpit received much more\nattention, and a distinction of longhand and shorthand sermons indicated\nthat on some he bestowed peculiar pains.  The late Andrew Fuller,\nattracted by his fame, having paid him a visit, tried to persuade him to\ngive up reading his sermons, believing that a more free delivery would\nadd infinitely to the impression.  Chalmers made various attempts to\ncarry out the extemporaneous method, but, instead of his acquiring more\nfreedom, the effect was the reverse.  At last he gave up all attempts at\nthe extemporaneous, both in his sermons and speeches, except in the way\nof parenthetical remarks designed to elucidate some point that had not\nbeen made sufficiently clear.\n\nBut we must not close the record of his Kilmany life without adverting\nto an important domestic event which took place about two years before\nhe left the place.  Till near that time he had, like Dr. Livingstone in\nAfrica at a later period, determined to lead the life of a bachelor.  A\nrecent disappointment in connection with an application for augmentation\nof stipend, confirmed him in that resolve. But neither Chalmers nor\nLivingstone had taken into reckoning a mysterious influence which can\nmake sport of the firmest resolutions, and prostrate strong men at the\nfeet of Hymen.  Chalmers had fallen in love with Miss Grace Pratt,\ndaughter of Captain Pratt of the First Royal Veteran Battalion, who had\nbeen living for some time with her uncle, Mr. Simson, at Starbank, in\nthe parish of Kilmany. The marriage took place on 4th August 1812, and\nthe union lasted for thirty-five years of unbroken domestic happiness.\nHis sister Jane, his housekeeper, had been married shortly before to Mr.\nMorton, a gentleman in Gloucestershire, and in communicating to her what\nwas probably a very unexpected piece of intelligence, he veiled the news\nunder an allegorical form which it may have taken her a little trouble\nto elucidate.  Referring to a recent but somewhat unsuccessful process\nof his before the Court of Tiends for augmentation of stipend, he said\nhe had been involved in another process before another court.  He had\nbeen defeated in the one, but he was glad to say he had been triumphant\nin the other.  In the latter case he had had to do the whole business\nhimself.  He had had to frame the summons and to conduct the pleadings.\nThere had been replies and duplies, and many a personal appearance at\ncourt before the process was settled.  At last a decision had been given\nin his favour.  But the law required the decision to be followed by a\nproclamation--not a single proclamation at the cross, but two\nproclamations, that had to be made within a quarter of a mile of his own\nhouse.  The letter concluded: 'I ken, Jane, you always thought me an\nill-pratted (mischievous) chiel; but, I can issure you, of all the\n_pratts_ I ever played, none was ever carried on, or even ended more\n_grace_-fully.'  And Mrs. Morton congratulated him on his victory.\n\nHis fame as a pulpit orator had now travelled from Maidenkirk to John o'\nGroats, and it could not be expected that he should be left in a\nsecluded country parish.  In Glasgow, the Tron parish church had become\nvacant, and Chalmers was suggested as successor to Dr. Macgill. It was\neasy for the anti-evangelical party to ridicule the idea of bringing a\nmadman to such a place; but a deputation from the Town Council, who were\npatrons of the church, went to hear him preach.  On the Sunday in\nquestion he preached, at Bendochy, a funeral sermon on Mr. Honey, a\nyoung minister whose fatal illness had been brought on by his exertions\nin saving from shipwreck seven exhausted sailors, whom, one by one, he\nbore from their stranded vessel to the shore.  The impression of that\nsermon was overpowering.  In spite of the opposition of the Duke of\nMontrose, Sir Islay Campbell, the Lord Provost, and the College,\nChalmers received from the Town Council a presentation to the Tron, and,\nafter considerable hesitation, accepted it.  It was a great wrench to\ntear himself from Kilmany, which he loved and admired so greatly, and\nfrom the people that were dear to him as his own children.  All his\nlife, Fife, and especially Kilmany, continued thus dear.  On his way to\nGlasgow he had occasion to climb the Calton Hill in Edinburgh, and the\nsight of Norman Law, which was visible from the windows of the manse of\nKilmany, quite overcame him. 'Oh! with what vivid remembrance can I\nwander in thought over all its farms and all its families, and dwell on\nthe kind and simple affection of its people, till the contemplation\nbecomes too bitter for my endurance.'\n\nIt was no less a trial to leave the work which was now advancing so\nhopefully in the parish.  But he could not be insensible to the claims\nof such a city as Glasgow, and the boundless field for usefulness it\nafforded.  And so, in great humility, and in great fear lest he should\nbe giving an undue preference to intellect and culture over poverty and\nobscurity, he accepted the call.  He preached a most impressive farewell\nsermon on 9th July 1815, which concluded with these words: 'Be assured,\nmy brethren, that after the dear and the much-loved scenery of this\npeaceful vale has disappeared from my eye, the people who live in it\nshall retain a warm and an ever-enduring place in my memory; and this\nmortal body must be stretched on the bed of death ere the heart that now\nanimates it can resign its exercise of longing after you, and praying\nfor you that you may so receive Christ Jesus, and so walk in Him, and so\nhold fast the things you have gotten, and so prove that the labour I\nhave had among you has not been in vain, that when the sound of the last\ntrumpet awakens us, these eyes which are now bathed in tears may open\nupon a scene of eternal blessedness, and we, my brethren, whom the\nprovidence of God has withdrawn for a little time from each other, may\non that day be found side by side at the right hand of the everlasting\nthrone.'\n\n\nWhen we compare Chalmers as he came to Kilmany and as he left it, we\nfind much that remains the same, and much that has been changed or\nmodified.\n\nRemaining the same, we find his singularly energetic, forceful nature;\nhis high integrity and kindliness of heart, as it constantly streamed\nout towards his family, his friends, and his flock; his eager desire for\nthe welfare of his people, for their advancement and elevation in all\nthat he counted good, pure, and noble; his indomitable energy of purpose\nand fearless contending for right and truth; his passionate intensity of\nconviction, rolling itself out in whirlwinds and tempests of eloquence,\nthat swept all before it.  The great change which he has undergone has\nnot destroyed these fundamental elements of character.\n\nNevertheless, all things have become new.  He has learned that true\nlife, in its every department, must be lived in fellowship with God.  He\nhas learned the way to God, to God reconciled, a loving Father, a\nconsiderate Master, a gracious Friend and Guide.  He has seen the\nreality of Christ's atonement, and of the work of the Holy Spirit, and\nfound a new value in prayer, and a new use of the sacred Scriptures.  He\nhas got new light on the true welfare of the people, and especially on\nthe need for every one of personal contact with Christ; new light, also,\non the true dignity of every individual man and woman in view of the\ncapacities of their souls and the immortality that is before them.  He\nhas found a nobler theme and a higher inspiration for that eloquence\nwhich has moulded his labours in the pulpit.  He is not less desirous to\nsee the people prosperous and happy, but he has been convinced that\ntheir true welfare is dependent on heavenly grace, and, in the case of\nthe poor, that there is nothing like Christian influence whether for\npreventing or alleviating the evils of poverty, or, where there are\npoor, raising them above the depressing conditions of their lot.  And\nthis is just the germ of that more comprehensive view of the conditions\nof social welfare to which he will be drawn when he finds himself side\nby side with the teeming thousands of Glasgow. He looks forward more\nardently than ever to the full development of the parochial system.  Nor\nhas his enthusiasm for science abated.  He has seen that, much though he\nloves it, it is not his part to devote to it the time needed for his\nmore immediate duties.  But now that he sees it more clearly than ever a\ndepartment of that great kingdom of God in which all interests are\ncombined in a wonderful unity, his respect for it is greater rather than\nless.  And, as a handmaid to the Gospel, he will soon find a noble use\nfor it in those astronomical discourses which are soon to arrest the\nattention of the intellectual world.\n\nThus equipped, and with these aims, Chalmers proceeds to Glasgow.  He is\ninducted into his new charge, 23rd July 1815.  His incumbency there is\nto be shorter even than at Kilmany; but the eight years that are now\nbefore him are to witness the commencement of a work and the advocacy of\na cause which will not only bring out the greatness of his character,\nbut tell on the welfare of the whole Church and country for generations\nto come.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER III\n\n                                GLASGOW\n\n                               1815-1823\n\n\nIt cannot be said that Chalmers took very kindly to Glasgow.  He missed\nthe wide expanse, the fresh air, the Arcadian simplicity of his\nmuch-loved Kilmany; also, the intimate acquaintance he had with every\nindividual, and the comparative leisure of a country life.  He found\nhimself 'cribbed, cabined, and confined' by streets and lanes and\n'lands,' and flung upon dense masses of population that baffled every\nattempt at individual acquaintance and interest.  No doubt the people\nwere most kind and hospitable, and if dinners and other entertainments\ncould have satisfied him, he might have had them to his heart's content.\nBut, bent as he was on his especial work, and eager to launch new plans\nof usefulness, it was irksome beyond endurance to have to devote whole\nafternoons and evenings to eating and drinking, considering the very\ntrifling amount of good that could be expected to come of such\nprotracted engagements.  And another thing that worried him was the\ntrifling matters of purely secular interest to which, as a director of\nsocieties, or a member of public boards, he was expected to give\nattention.  Fancy an hour spent in debating whether a certain ditch was\nto be covered over or not; fancy himself and his brother-directors\nengaged in a long controversy whether pork soup or ox-tail soup should\nbe served to the inmates of an institution, and finally resorting to a\npractical test--a portion of each kind being brought to each director to\ntaste!  Then there was an expectation that much of his time should be\ndevoted to certain attentions that people liked to be paid to them.\nWhy, a funeral was hardly counted respectable unless there were four\nclergymen in attendance!  Much nervous energy was consumed in resisting\nthese unreasonable expectations, and if Chalmers had not come to be a\ngreat man, and possessed of a fame which overbore everything, he would\ncertainly have suffered not a little in reputation from the necessity of\nso often applying a snub where kindness was meant, and becoming a\ntransgressor where tradition had established its law.\n\nDuring the eight years of his Glasgow incumbency many things happened,\nworthy to be noticed even in a short biography like this.  First of all,\nhis fame as a pulpit orator reached its climax; a climax never surpassed\nand seldom equalled in the whole annals of the pulpit.  In the next\nplace, his ideas of the advantages of the parochial system, brought from\nKilmany, were matured, expanded, and practically applied, with results\nthat demonstrated in a wonderful way their Christian wisdom and\nexcellence.  Further, as an author, he rose to a higher platform; his\nastronomical and commercial discourses, when published, spread his fame\nfar and wide; and a quarterly publication which he issued on the _Civic\nand Christian Economy of Large Towns_ showed the zeal and wisdom with\nwhich he grappled with his parochial obligations.  Meanwhile, in his\ncloset, he was intensely occupied with the great problem of his personal\nspiritual life; ever and anon placing himself in the immediate presence\nof God, detecting and deploring his infirmities and deficiencies,\nstriving to walk with God in every undertaking, duty, and recreation;\ntrying hard to resist the subtle influence of human applause; and\nlonging much for that absolute consecration which would efface self, and\nmake God all in all.  Still further, he was most assiduous in\naffectionate duty to his friends and family; correspondence with father,\nmother, wife, children, and friends went on without ceasing, even in the\nbusiest periods of public life, and always with an eager desire to\npromote their highest good.  And many an important call to other spheres\nof labour arose from time to time to distract his attention; now he was\noffered this important charge, now that; at one time he was entreated to\nbecome a candidate for the natural philosophy chair at Edinburgh, and at\nanother for that of moral philosophy; now he was called to London to\npreach a missionary sermon, and at another time he found it necessary to\nmake a long tour through England to acquire information about the\nworking of the poor-law system.  That he was able to sustain life under\nthe prodigious pressure of all these varied engagements cannot but\nsurprise us, and cannot but excite our admiration of the remarkable\nphysical and mental energy that was able to endure it.  But it had its\neffects; and one of these was, that feeling himself unable to sustain\nthe pressure of such an accumulation of burdens, and desirous to\nprosecute more vigorously his work as an author, he accepted, in 1823,\nthe unanimous offer made to him of the chair of moral philosophy at St.\nAndrews, though the sphere in itself was absolutely insignificant, and\nthe salary not more than L300 a year.\n\nThe first sermon he preached in Glasgow, a few months before his\nsettlement as minister of the Tron parish, was on behalf of the Society\nfor the Sons and Daughters of the Clergy.  The more intellectual part\nwas an exposition of the principles of Christian charity and his views\nof pauperism, and the more eloquent part was a touching picture of the\nfamily of a deceased clergyman, called to tear themselves from all the\nbeauties of their home, when their hearts were overborne with the far\ndarker melancholy of a father torn from their embrace.  Dean Ramsay, who\nheard this sermon, remarked, in his biographical notice of Chalmers to\nthe Royal Society of Edinburgh, that the tears of the father and\npreacher fell like raindrops on the manuscript, and from many another\neye the like tokens of sensibility were seen to flow.\n\nIt is of his appearance on this occasion that an elaborate description\nwas given by Mr. J. G. Lockhart in his pseudonymous publication,\n_Peter's Letters to his Kinsfolk_.  It has been reproduced in almost\nevery biography, but the picture is too striking to be wholly left out\nhere.  After describing other features of the face, he remarks:--\n\n\n'The eyes are light in colour, and have a strange, dreamy heaviness that\nconveys any idea rather than that of dulness, but which contrasts in a\nwonderful manner with the dazzling, watery glare they exhibit when\nexpanded in their sockets, and illuminated into all their flame and\nfervour in some moment of high entranced enthusiasm.  But the shape of\nthe forehead is perhaps the most singular part of the whole visage; ...\nit is without exception the most mathematical forehead I ever met with,\nbeing far wider across the eyebrows than either Mr. Playfair's or Mr.\nLeslie's....  Immediately above the extraordinary breadth of this\nregion, in the forehead, there is an arch of imagination carrying out\nthe summit boldly and roundly, in a style to which the heads of very few\npoets present anything comparable, and over this region again there is a\ngrand apex of high and solemn veneration and love....  Never perhaps did\nthe world possess an orator whose minutest peculiarities of gesture and\nvoice have more power in increasing the effect of what he says.'  [The\nwriter then dilates on his defects in gesture and pronunciation, and the\ndisappointment caused by his first utterances.]  'But then, with what\ntenfold richness does this dim, preliminary curtain make the glories of\nhis eloquence to shine forth, when the heated spirit at length flings\nfrom it its chill, confining fetters, and bursts out elate and rejoicing\nin the full splendour of its disimprisoned wings.... I have heard many\nmen deliver sermons far better arranged in regard to argument, and have\nheard very many deliver sermons far more uniform in elegance both of\nconception and of style; but most unquestionably I have never heard,\nwhether in England or in Scotland, or in any other country, any preacher\nwhose eloquence is capable of producing an effect so strong and\nirresistible as his.'\n\n\nIt was soon after, that on hearing a speech of Chalmers's Lord Jeffrey\nremarked, 'I know not what it is, but there is something altogether\nremarkable about that man.  It reminds me more of what one reads of as\nthe effect of the eloquence of Demosthenes than anything I ever heard.'\n\nAn extraordinary impression was produced by a sermon preached before the\nLord High Commissioner, during the proceedings of the Assembly, from the\ntext, 'When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon\nand the stars, which Thou hast ordained; what is man, that Thou art\nmindful of him? and the son of man, that Thou visitest him?'  There was\na reference to the infidel argument that modern astronomy, through the\nrevelation by the telescope of the boundless multitude of worlds\nexisting in the heavens, had shown the earth to be too insignificant a\nsection of God's universe to justify the incarnation and sacrifice of\nthe Son of God.  To refute this objection, Chalmers brought forward the\nnot less wonderful discoveries by the microscope of the minuteness of\nGod's works, and the conclusion was irresistibly established that there\nis 'not one portion of the universe of God too minute for His notice,\nnor too humble for the visitations of His care.'\n\nThis sermon was one of a series which Chalmers, on whom the degree of\nD.D. had been conferred by the University of Glasgow (21st February\n1816), was now delivering there.  It had been an old practice of the\nministers of Glasgow, of whom there were then eight, to preach in turn\non Thursdays in the Tron Church, and Dr. Chalmers, deeming it fitting\nthat week-day sermons should have a character of their own, selected the\ndiscoveries of modern astronomy as the basis of his course.  The\ninterest and novelty of the subject, as well as the fame of the\npreacher, drew extraordinary crowds to the church.  In January 1817, the\nseries being completed, the sermons were published in a volume.  The\ndemand was marvellous. Nine editions were called for within a year, and\nnearly 20,000 copies were circulated.  And, beyond the ordinary circle\nof sermon readers, men like Hazlitt and Canning were arrested and\nimpressed.  The sermons necessarily bore the marks of a hasty, and in\nsome respects a juvenile production; this Chalmers himself afterwards\nacknowledged, and his own preference was given to another series--the\n'Commercial Discourses,' which bore 'On the Application of Christianity\nto the Commercial and Ordinary Affairs of Life,' and were published in\n1820.\n\nThe Astronomicals had been reviewed, not quite favourably, by John\nFoster, whose acquaintance Chalmers made about this time.  But, so far\nfrom showing any chagrin at the freedom of his comments, Chalmers at\nonce took Foster to his heart; and there was no public writer of the day\nof whom he thought more highly, or whom he more warmly commended in\nafter days to his students.  Some of the Reviews treated the sermons\nseverely; but from Christopher North, in _Blackwood_, they received\nhearty commendation.\n\nHis popularity in Glasgow was almost surpassed by that which he found in\nLondon.  In May 1817 he preached in Surrey Chapel for the London\nMissionary Society.  His publisher, Mr. Smith, who accompanied him,\nwrote home, 'All my expectations were overwhelmed in the triumph.\nNothing from the Tron pulpit ever excelled it, nor did he ever more\narrest and wonder-work his audience.  I had a full view of the whole\nplace.  The carrying forward of minds was never so visible to me; a\nconstant assent of the head from the whole people accompanied all his\nparagraphs; and the breathlessness of expectation permitted not the\nbeating of a heart to agitate the stillness.'\n\nPreaching for the Hibernian Society, he had a beautiful passage on Irish\ncharacter, which affected Mr. Canning to tears.  'The tartan,' he said,\n'beats us all.'  Mr. Wilberforce had brought Canning, along with\nHuskisson and Lord Binning to the chapel, where they found Lord Elgin,\nLord Harrowby, and many others.  In another chapel, on the same day, the\ncrowd that had gathered in the street was so vast that even the preacher\nhimself had great difficulty in getting admission.  We know what a\ncompliment it is, _laudari a laudatis_.  It was about this time that he\nformed the acquaintance of the greatest pulpit orator of England, Robert\nHall, who wrote thus to him, 'It would be difficult not to congratulate\nyou on the unrivalled and unbounded popularity which attended you in the\nmetropolis....  The attention which your sermons have excited is\nprobably unequalled in modern literature.'\n\nOne might fill a whole volume with notices of his popularity, and of the\nremarkable triumphs of his eloquence. To many, the wonder was increased\nwhen they learned the circumstances in which his sermons were sometimes\ncomposed.  On one occasion, while enjoying his holiday, word was brought\nto him of the sudden death of the Princess Charlotte, and of his being\nlooked for in Glasgow to preach on the day of her funeral.  This letter\nreached him on a Sunday, while he was preaching at Kilmany; posting on\nMonday from Kirkcaldy to Queensferry, he got a seat on the mail to\nEdinburgh; he arrived in Glasgow, after a night journey, between five\nand six on Tuesday morning, and next forenoon preached one of his most\nbrilliant discourses. Wherever the coach stopped to change horses, he\nrushed into the inn, wrote a few sentences, then rushed out to continue\nhis journey.  And the sermon was not a mere appeal to feelings.  A large\npart of it consisted of an elaborate plea for a larger provision for the\nspiritual necessities of great cities,--being the germ of that plan of\nchurch extension and parochial cultivation which was to form the great\nbusiness of his life.\n\nTwice every Sunday he usually filled his pulpit in the Tron Church; and\nwhen latterly, in St. John's, he had the Rev. Edward Irving as his\nassistant, the two supplied two pulpits--the parish church and a chapel\nof ease--while other engagements were often undertaken in various parts\nof the country.  But the work of the pulpit could hardly be reckoned as\nthe chief of Dr. Chalmers's labours.  His regard for the old parochial\neconomy of the Kirk of Scotland was a supreme feeling; he looked on\nevery minister as having charge of the people of the parish, and held\nthat it was his duty to watch over their spiritual condition.  It was\nhis sense of the infinite importance of this, if Christianity was to\nretain any hold on the people of our cities, that had made him such an\nenemy of pluralities, and that roused his intense opposition to the\nsettlement of Dr. Duncan Macfarlane as minister of the High Church of\nGlasgow, while he retained the office of Principal of the University.\nHe knew for certain that the result would be the almost total neglect of\na parish of upwards of ten thousand souls.\n\nThe population of the Tron parish was between eleven and twelve\nthousand.  Dr. Chalmers never devoted himself to the regular visitation\nof the extra-parochial families that formed, to a large extent, his\nordinary congregation; where there was sickness or death, he would visit\nthem, but not in ordinary circumstances.  His concern was with the\npeople of the parish.  His first object was to ascertain their general\ncondition, and for this purpose he determined on a house-to-house\nvisitation.  It was a Herculean task.  He could but spend a few minutes\nin each house, give a kindly greeting, put a few questions, perhaps\nutter an earnest word of Christian counsel, and then invite the inmates\nto the place where an evening service would be held for the benefit of\nall.  And on the whole it was a depressing task; for he found that a\ngreat proportion of the people had no seats in any place of worship, and\nwere in deep ignorance on the high matters of faith and eternity.  He\nhad his plans of reformation in readiness, but these involved the\nenlistment and training of a large body of helpers.  As a first step in\nthis direction, on, 20th December 1816, he ordained a few younger men to\nthe office of the eldership, calling on them very earnestly to eschew\nthe example set by many elders around them, who attended only to things\ntemporal, and to devote themselves, by household visitation and other\nmeans, to the superintendence of the spiritual interests of their\ndistricts.  So earnestly was he devoted to the welfare of his parish,\nthat sometimes, when his family were in the country, he would live in a\nhumble room, at a rent of six shillings a week, in order to be near his\nwork; at other times he would dine in the little vestry-room attached to\nhis church.\n\nNext, to meet the alarming ignorance of spiritual truth, he instituted a\nSabbath Evening School Society, and got a few members of his\ncongregation to work it.  At the end of two years, upwards of two\nthousand children were under instruction by this means.  'Our meetings,'\nsays one of the members, 'were very delightful.  I never saw any set of\nmen who were so animated by one spirit, and whose zeal was so steadily\nsustained.  The Doctor was the life of the whole. He was ever most ready\nto receive a hint or suggestion from the youngest or most inexperienced\nmember; and if any useful hint came from such a one, he was careful to\ngive him the full merit of it, generally by his name.  Although we had\nno set forms of teaching, we consulted over all the modes, that we might\nfind the best.'\n\nThe outstanding peculiarity of these schools was that they were\nterritorial.  They were, in the first instance, at least, for the\nchildren of the parish, and for these alone.  The children were gathered\nthrough the visitation of the Doctor's agents, the result being that, in\nthis way, an immensely larger number got the benefit of Sabbath-school\ninstruction than when a general system of schools prevailed, to which\nany one might go or not go as he was inclined.\n\nAt a later period, he entered on a more costly educational undertaking.\nIn his Sunday schools, he found many children that could read in a way,\nbut with such hesitation and difficulty as showed that reading was no\npleasure to them, and that it was sure not to be practised as an\nordinary habit. Glasgow was then very deficient in day schools.  When he\nwent to St. John's, he determined to remedy this defect, in so far as\nthat parish was concerned.  Setting the example himself by a L100\ncontribution, he soon obtained the necessary funds.  'Within two years\nfrom the commencement of his ministry, four efficient teachers, each\nendowed to the extent of L25 per annum, were educating 419 scholars;\nand, when he left Glasgow in 1823, other school buildings were in\nprocess of erection, capable of accommodating 374 additional pupils; so\nthat the fruit of four years' labour was the leaving behind him the\nmeans and facilities for giving, at a very moderate rate, a superior\neducation to no less than 693 children, out of a population of ten\nthousand souls.'\n\nThe management of the poor was, as we have seen, a subject which, even\nbefore he came to Glasgow, had begun to occupy his very earnest\nthoughts, and on which he had formed decided views.  To some prevalent\nnotions on the subject, especially in England, he entertained very\nstrong objections, for he held that their tendency was to increase\npauperism, so that the more money that was spent, the greater did the\nevil become.  There were two beneficial influences in particular that a\nsystem of compulsory poor-rates was fitted to impair--the spirit of\nindependence, and the readiness of friends and relatives to assist the\npoor. When it came to be understood that the poor had a legal claim to\nbe supported from the rates, they would cease to make any exertion to be\nthrifty and independent, and their friends and relatives would cease to\ncharge themselves with their maintenance.  Dr. Chalmers was persuaded\nthat, so long as these two beneficial influences remained in active\noperation, the poor might be maintained at a far less cost than would be\npossible under a scheme of compulsory rates. His plan was to fall back\non the New Testament method--to have a body of deacons specially charged\nwith the care of the poor; to assign to each deacon a certain limited\nproportion of the parish, instruct him to make very full inquiries into\nthe case of every one applying for help, endeavour in every case where\ndestitution was caused by want of work, to find work for the applicant;\nor where there were friends or relatives able to help, to draw on their\nresources before application should be made to the public fund.  So long\nas he was minister of the Tron parish, there were insurmountable\ndifficulties to carrying this plan into execution.  But the creation of\nthe new parish of St. John's altered the case. Dr. Chalmers was\ndetermined not to accept the appointment to that parish unless he should\nbe allowed full liberty to carry out his plans for the maintenance of\nthe poor.  After a considerable amount of fighting, he at length got all\nthe liberty he asked.  The turmoil and worries to which he was exposed\nin contending with old opinions, old practices and prejudices of all\nsorts, were like to prostrate him.  But as soon as this battle was over,\nanother remained to be fought. He must prove, by practical\ndemonstration, not only that his scheme was workable, but that in its\neffects it would be a great improvement on the other.  He must undertake\nthe management of all the poor in a parish of ten thousand souls--the\npoorest parish in the city.  With this great undertaking he now\nproceeded to grapple.\n\nWhat he undertook was, to relinquish all claim to the fund raised by\nassessment, and provide for the poor of St. John's parish through the\nchurch-door collections alone. It was arranged that the then actual\ninmates of the town's poorhouse, connected with the parish, would be\nmaintained as before, but that no new cases would be sent there; all the\nnew outdoor cases, and all the other cases of pauperism, were to be\ndefrayed from the congregational fund.  Hitherto the cost of the poor in\nthe parish had been at the rate of L1400 per annum, whereas the\ncollections amounted to only L480. Thus, though not at first, yet\nultimately, St. John's Church would be responsible for an amount of\npauperism that had hitherto cost L1400.\n\nThe unwearied visitation of the deacons produced highly beneficial\nresults.  Sometimes very appalling cases of distress were found to be\nwholly fabulous.  A poor woman applied to a deacon to bury a grown-up\ndaughter who had died that day.  He refused until he had made a personal\nvisit.  This he did, but no such person could be found. Next day the\nwoman renewed her application: a young man was sent by the deacon to\nverify the woman's statement; but she disappeared in the crowd.  When\nthe matter was stated to another deacon, he wondered whether the woman's\nhusband, whom he had helped to bury six months before, were still alive.\nThe two went in quest of the family, and found the buried husband and\nthe dead daughter performing all the functions of life.\n\nIn other cases, relatives were induced to take charge of destitute\nchildren, or older children to take charge of younger.  In one case, the\nfather and mother of a family composed of six children both died; three\nof the six were earning wages, and three were unable to work.  The three\nelder applied to have the three younger admitted to the poorhouse.  It\nwas pointed out to them by Dr. Chalmers's agents that this would be a\ngreat slur on the family; and a small quarterly allowance was promised\nif they should keep together.  The advice was taken, and the quarterly\nallowance was but twice required.  The family lived together, gaining a\ncharacter for independence and brotherliness that in itself must have\nbeen a considerable help to their success in life.  And many other such\ncases occurred.\n\nThe result of these operations, during the three years and nine months\nwhen Dr. Chalmers personally presided over them, was instructive and\nstriking.  The whole number of new cases admitted on the roll was\ntwenty, and the annual cost of these was L66.  The number of cases\noriginally committed to Dr. Chalmers was ninety-eight, of whom\ntwenty-eight had died, and thirteen had been displaced in consequence of\na scrutiny, leaving (with the twenty new cases) seventy-seven on the\nroll, the cost of whose yearly maintenance was L190.  In the second year\nof their operations the church was able to take the whole of the\npoorhouse inmates connected with the parish off that institution, at an\nexpense to themselves of L90 a year.  In this way the pauperism that had\ncost the town L1400 was now managed at an expenditure of L280.  And the\npauperism itself became a decreasing quantity.  'The St. John's deacons,\nmingling as they did familiarly with all the families, and proving\nthemselves by word and deed the true but enlightened friends of all, did\nfar more to prevent pauperism than to provide for it.'\n\nIt cannot be said that his theory of pauperism was a hasty scheme, the\nresult of mere benevolent impulse, or that Chalmers did not take\nsufficient means to acquaint himself with the subject in all its\naspects.  He had already given expression to his ideas in the _Edinburgh\nReview_, and shown that the matter had engaged his most earnest study.\nLater, he made an elaborate journey through England in order to become\npersonally acquainted with the places and the persons there most\nconversant with the subject. This visit embraced Liverpool, Manchester,\nBirmingham, Gloucester, Wells, Salisbury, Southampton, Portsmouth,\nLondon, Bury St. Edmunds, Bedford, and Nottingham. The journey occupied\nseven weeks, and in the course of it he came into contact with many of\nthe public men who were interested in that class of subjects,\nconspicuous among whom were Lord Calthorpe and Mr. Fowell Buxton.  The\nanti-slavery leaders, such as Mr. Z. Macaulay, Mr. Babington, and Mr.\nClarkson, were generally sympathetic, but their energies were too much\nabsorbed in the anti-slavery movement to admit of their throwing them\ninto Dr. Chalmers's scheme.  Indeed there were but few men of mark at\nthat time interested in social questions.  In his sense of the urgency\nof these questions, Dr. Chalmers was before his age.  The more immediate\nobject he had in view, that of gathering information, was sufficiently\naccomplished; but there is no indication that he made much progress in\nindoctrinating public men with his views.  If ever he cherished the hope\nthat a party would arise in England who should deal with pauperism on\nhis lines, that hope was never fulfilled.  Nor was it the privilege of\nDr. Chalmers to find his experiment carried out thoroughly in other\nplaces, or even to witness its permanence in his own chosen locality.\nFor several years it continued to prosper; in 1830, ten years after the\ncommencement of the undertaking, he informed a committee of the House of\nCommons that the whole annual expense of St. John's pauperism for the\npreceding year had been L384; and in 1833, Mr. Tufnell, an English\nPoor-Law Commissioner, reported: 'The system has been attended with the\nmost triumphant success; it is now in perfect operation, and not a doubt\nis expressed by its managers of its continuing to remain so.'  Why,\nthen, did the system not extend?  Mainly, we believe, because Chalmers\nstood alone in that unrivalled energy which could not only conceive and\nplan the scheme and fight down its opponents, but likewise find\ncompetent agents, and inspire them with his own spirit in order to carry\nit into effect.  It was a scheme that demanded a strong magnetic power\non the part of its head to overcome the _vis inertiae_ of ordinary men,\nand send them into the field, and keep them in the field, vigilant,\nalert, unwearied, and hopeful.  No doubt his principles were acted on to\na certain extent in many parishes where there was no pressure of\npoverty;[2] but we are not aware of any instance in which his plan was\nboldly made to do duty in the heart of a large city parish.\n\n  [2] _E.g._ Dirleton, under Rev. Mr. Stark.  See Hanna's _Life_, iii.\n      121.\n\nAnd why did the experiment not become permanent? Because two conditions\nunder which it was established were not kept.  One was, that a law of\nresidence should be established between the parishes of the city, so\nthat St. John's should not be burdened with a pauperism which it had\ndone nothing to create.  The other condition was, that so long as St.\nJohn's kept its own poor, it should be exempted from any assessment for\nthe poor generally. Neither of these conditions was kept.  Moreover, the\nexpense for lunatics and exposed children grew at a much greater rate\nthan the population, and a chapel of ease, expected to be a great help,\nturned out a failure.  And at no time did the authorities of the city\nand the other parishes give the countenance that might have been\nexpected to so successful and economical a scheme.  The result was that,\nin 1837, the parish of St. John's lapsed into the general system of\nGlasgow.  And later, after a vehement opposition from Dr. Chalmers, the\npresent law, supporting the poor by assessment, was passed, which\nvirtually put an end to the old paternal method of administration.  It\nwas easy to represent the plan of Dr. Chalmers as a niggardly system,\nwhich doled out mere driblets of charity, not sufficient to keep soul\nand body together.  But it was forgotten that one of its main objects\nwas to keep those subsidiary streamlets running which the affection of\nrelatives and the compassion of neighbours supplied, as well as to\nencourage the independence, the industry, the thrift, and the sobriety\nwhich would have kept pauperism afar off.  The undeniable result of the\ncompulsory system has been an enormous addition to the cost of\npauperism, and we fear, it must be added, a serious diminution of those\ngood old Scottish habits which discouraged and prevented its growth.\nThe increase of drinking has tended greatly not only to the growth, but\nto the unmanageableness of pauperism.  If the drink-curse could be\neffectively dealt with, there would be no need for a poor-assessment;\nthe churches of the country, as in time past, would be quite able, as\nthey would be cordially willing, to support the poor.\n\n\nIn connection with the literary labours of Dr. Chalmers, reference has\nalready been made to the publication of the _Astronomical Discourses_ in\n1817 and the _Commercial Discourses_ in 1820.  In addition to these, we\nhave to note a volume of _Miscellaneous Discourses_ published in 1819.\nWhile this volume was passing through the press, he expressed his belief\nthat it would bring another nest of hornets about him, in the shape of\nangry critics and reviewers.  'It has been singularly the fate of my\npublications to be torn to pieces in the journals, but at the same time\nto be extensively bought and read.'  An edition of seven thousand copies\nof the new volume was printed, but the result was the reverse of what he\nanticipated; the journals did not cut it up, nor did the public buy it\nup, with the same avidity as before.  But even in this our day of vast\neditions, seven thousand copies of a volume of sermons would be an\nunprecedented undertaking.\n\nA much more out-of-the-way publication, in the successive numbers, was\nthe _Civic and Christian Economy of Large Towns_.  This was most\nemphatically a Chalmerian project. It originated about the time of his\nappointment to St. John's, in his determination to set himself right\nagainst a calumnious charge that he was secretly aiming at a vacant\nchair in the University of Edinburgh, and ready to leave in the lurch\nthe friends who were to aid him in the St. John's undertaking.  Nothing\ncould have hurt him more than a charge of underhand scheming.  A\nfugitive pamphlet might have served his purpose; but a wider project\ntook hold of him, of enlightening his congregation and the public\ngenerally from time to time on all that concerned the prosperous\nadministration of the parish, and of large towns generally.  The first\nnumber was published on 24th September 1819, and the succeeding numbers\nfollowed quarterly in unbroken succession until his removal to St.\nAndrews. We see again how far he was in advance of his age in the\nimportance which he attached to a sound Christian economy of large\ncities.  Seventy-eight years ago, large towns were far fewer than they\nare now, and of course much smaller, and they had scarcely begun to\nattract attention as a novel and difficult feature of our social\ncondition.  Yet Chalmers was all alive to their importance, and keenly\npondered the measures necessary for their administration.  And the\nresult shows how true his forecast was.  Not only had he thought out the\nproblem, and arrived at its solution, but he had set to work practically\nto carry his plan into execution; and to this he now added the\nadditional function of expounding and defending it in a quarterly\npublication. And all the while he was carrying on his unrivalled work in\nthe pulpit; he was superintending all the machinery of the parish; he\nwas cultivating most conscientiously the vineyard of his own soul; and\nhe was interesting himself in all that concerned his friends, and in a\nthousand other objects and projects that were continually pressing upon\nhis attention.\n\n\nIt is not easy to describe the earnest personal dealings with God which\nhe maintained during the whole time of this busy Glasgow ministry.  To\nthose who can enter into this high phase of life, no aspect of his\ncharacter is more remarkable. Sometimes the intensity of his thirst\nafter a high spiritual life appears in his letters, but more directly in\nhis diary. Immediately after the commencement of his Glasgow ministry,\nhe formed an almost romantic friendship with a young man of the name of\nSmith, whom he looked on as his first convert.  Alongside of this youth\n(as of Mr. Anderson at Kilmany) he placed himself as if they were on the\nsame footing--fellow-learners, fellow-pilgrims, fellow-suppliants,\nequally in need of the grace and guidance of God.  'O God, do Thou look\npropitiously on our friendship.  Do Thou purify it from all that is\nbase, sordid, and earthly. May it be altogether subordinated to the love\nof Thee. May it be the instrument of great good to each of our souls.\nMay it sweeten the path of our worldly pilgrimage: and after death has\ndivided us for a season, may it find its final blessedness and\nconsummation at the right hand of Thine everlasting throne.'  During Mr.\nSmith's last illness he wrote to him at least once a day and saw him\nvery often. Sometimes he would carry his manuscript to his room and\nwrite his sermon there.  It was during an absence of Dr. Chalmers from\nGlasgow that he died.  'On my return, Thomas Smith was dead.  I have\nbeen thrown into successive floods of tenderness.'  In the prayer\noffered at his funeral, which has been preserved, he expressed the\nwarmest thanks for all the grace given to this young man, and all the\ngood his example and influence had done; and for himself as well as for\nothers he prayed most fervently that they might all 'retire from the\nscene with hearts bettered, with minds resolved to forsake all for\nChrist, with affections weaned from this world and all its lying\nvanities.'\n\nVery beautiful, too, was the outpouring of his feelings towards her who\nhad become the partner of his life, his best beloved and most longed for\non earth.  Before she was his wife the prayer had risen, 'O my God, pour\nThy best blessings on G.  Give her ardent and decided Christianity; may\nshe be the blessing and the joy of all around her; may her light shine\nwhile she lives; and when she dies, may it be a mere step--a transition\nin her march to a joyful eternity.'  And afterwards he wrote to her: 'I\nhave to request of my dear G. that she stir herself up to lay hold of\nGod.  Do act faith on the great truths of divine revelation.  Do cry\nmightily to God for pardon in the name and for the sake of Christ; and,\nrelying on the power of His blood and of His Spirit, commit yourself to\nHim in well-doing as unto a faithful Creator.'\n\nHow well worthy Mrs. Chalmers was of being the wife of such a man was\nbest known to those who enjoyed the intimate friendship of the family.\nThe late Dr. Smith of St. George's, Glasgow, who knew them intimately,\nfrom having been Dr. Chalmers's assistant, held her to be 'in all\nrespects a helpmeet for her distinguished husband.  She strengthened his\nhands and encouraged his heart in every labour of love.  As a wife, a\nmother, a mistress, a friend, a disciple of Him who was meek and lowly\nin spirit, few are better entitled to affection's warmest tribute.'\n\nBut it was in the direct communings of his spirit with God that the\ndepth of his humility and the ardour of his desires for a higher life\nwere most apparent:--\n\n\n'_March 3rd_, 1818.--Cannot say much of my walk with God.  Do not burn\nwith love to man.  _5th_.--Cannot yet record a close walk with God.  Got\nimpatient with a man who called on me and with ---- in the evening.  O\nfor a humbler and nearer course of devotedness to the will of my\nSaviour. _6th_.--Have not yet attained such a walk with God that in\nlooking to the day that is gone I can see anything like the general\ncomplexion of godliness.  _7th_.--Cannot yet speak to my walk with God.\nWill a quiet confidence in Christ not bring this about? _8th_.--Not yet.\nO my God, help me.  _9th_.--Not yet.  Trust that I am finding my way to\nChrist as the Lord my Strength. O guard me against the charms of human\npraise!'\n\n\nAt a later period he is equally humble and equally fervent.\n\n\n'_Feb. 24th_, 1822.--Was greatly impressed with Erskine's talk about\nrealising God every quarter of an hour.  O heavenly Father, let me do\nit, and free me from the sense of guilt towards Thyself, and enable me\nrightly and rejoicingly to lift up my head, too, in the presence of mine\nenemies. _25th_.--Disturbed, but feel great alleviation in habitual\nrealisings of God, which I have had all this day.  _28th_.--O my\nSaviour, I can do nothing for Thee!  _April 7th_.--It is humiliating\namid the busy externals of religion to think how little my soul is\ntaking up or making progress therein.  _9th_.--O my God, cause me to\nhold thee in constant remembrance.  Restore energy to me, but let me\nnever lose sight of my creatureship and my worthlessness.  May I be pure\nin heart, and so see God.  Loose all my bonds, and may I serve Thee with\ndelight and thankfulness all my days.'\n\n\nIt is obvious to modern readers, though it was not to him, that when he\nwas most depressed, a share of the depression was due to physical\nexhaustion.  The number, the constancy, and the intensity of his labours\ncould not but dull the faculties that soar highest of all, and call as a\nremedy for physical rest; while, like so many others in the like\ncircumstances, he was laying all the blame on the wickedness or the\nearthliness of his heart.\n\n\nWith the members of his family he maintained the closest fellowship.\nWhen he heard of his father having had a paralytic stroke, he hurried to\nhis bedside, and was present at the end.  His affection and respect for\nhim were unabated.  'My dear father is lovely in death.  There is all\nthe mildness of heaven upon his aged countenance.' Writing on the\nfollowing Sunday to his much-loved sister Jane (Mrs. Morton), he says:\n'It is truly affecting when the thought of former Sabbaths in Anster\npresents itself to my mind, and I think of it as the day he loved, and\nhow the ringing of the bells was ever to him the note of joyful\ninvitation to the house of God; the sight of the people going to and\nfrom the church--the interval--the everything connected with the\nSabbath, bring the whole of my father's habits in lively recollection\nbefore me, and call forth a fresh excitement of tenderness.'\n\nTowards his widowed mother he ever acted with the most tender and\nrespectful affection.  His letters to her were both frequent and\nregular, full of concern for her temporal and spiritual comfort, and\nmanifesting that interest in all the members of the family which is so\ngrateful to a mother's heart.\n\nBut the fullest outpourings of his heart, in his correspondence with\nfriends at a distance, were to his sister, Mrs. Morton.  Well could he\nassure 'my ever dearest Jane'--'one of the purest and most delightful of\nall my feelings in this world of many distractions is the feeling of\ntenderness which I ever associate with you and all your concerns'; nor\nwas he less sincere in saying that he could think of 'no more delightful\nscene of occasional rest and recreation than the neighbourhood where\nProvidence had ordained her habitation, so rich in the beauties of\nnature, and still richer in the pieties and charities of the excellent\npeople that lived in it.'  To her he writes freely of all the events of\nhis life, and still more of the vicissitudes of his Christian\nexperience, and of the ever open refuge alike from domestic sorrows and\nspiritual infirmities which we have in the grace of our Saviour and in\nthe love of our Father.  All the more tenderly did he write when the\ndeep shadow of bereavement fell upon her home; when a heart full of\nhumility and somewhat disposed to despondency was liable to be swallowed\nup with over much sorrow, and to forget (as he reminded her) that even\nwhen the day is overcast and lowering, the sun is shining with\nundiminished lustre.\n\nHis eldest brother, James, who lived in London, was a hard subject to\ndeal with.  He seemed to shut himself up from all his family, and to\nstand in awe lest they should come to visit him.  He had resolutely\nabstained from hearing his brother preach after he became famous. Hardly\nany case could have more convincingly verified the remark, how unlike\nbrothers may be to each other.  James had a kind of mania for balancing\nhis personal accounts to the minutest fraction, and on one occasion\nworried himself for months in the endeavour to account for a penny, till\na year after, when about to cross a toll-bridge, he remembered that he\nhad crossed it a twelvemonth before, and forgot to enter the penny in\nhis accounts.  Yet Thomas bore with him patiently, and dealt with him\naffectionately but faithfully, evidently in the hope that he might\nchange.  And before the end he did become more amiable.  In announcing\nhis father's death, Thomas pathetically, and with an obvious practical\ndesign, remarked that if their beloved parent looked down upon them,\n'nothing could afford his spirit a more delightful spectacle than that\nof his children seeking the Gospel which they had aforetime despised,\npraying for grace, and not ceasing to pray, till they had obtained.'\n\nHis own children were hardly old enough, while in Glasgow, for more than\nthe ordinary fondness of a father. Yet we find him, in his absences from\nhome, and when driven hither and thither by manifold engagements,\nwriting, in imitation of print, those elaborate letters to his little\ndaughter Anne, of which her future husband, Dr. Hanna, has given us a\nsample in the second volume of the _Life_ (p. 410).  One cannot but\nadmire the extreme neatness and clearness of the printing, a memorable\ncontrast to the hieroglyphics he used to dash off on ordinary occasions,\nwhich were so illegible that, in his early days, when a letter came from\nhim, his father suggested that it had better be kept till he should\nhimself arrive to read it for them. Once, in the absence of Mrs.\nChalmers, when he had been constituted head nurse, an elder and a\ndeacon, on calling in the evening, found him squatting on the floor and\nplaying at marbles with the children.  And nothing would serve him but\nthat they should join in the game.\n\nThe ever-warm affection of Dr. Chalmers for all the members of his\nfamily was the more remarkable that he was so rapidly extending the\ncircle of his friends, receiving so much notice from the most\ndistinguished men and women of the country, and carrying on so\nvoluminous a correspondence with many of them.  Among those whose\nacquaintance he made in his Glasgow period we may note a few.  There was\nJames Montgomery, Moravian and poet, whom he saw at Sheffield; whom he\ngreatly perplexed when he told him that when at the Moravian settlement\nof Fulneck, near Leeds, he had invited the Scotch lads to the inn, and\nfound there were no fewer than 'saxtain or savantain of them'; but whom\nhe charmed no less by the admiration he expressed for the Moravian\nmissions, and by his undertaking--what he more than fulfilled--to raise\nL500 for them in the course of the year.  Another new friend was Mr.\nWilberforce, for whose character, talents, and work he had unbounded\nrespect, but who amazed him by the singularity of his movements--'he\npositively danced and whisked about like a squirrel.'  He had an\nimportant correspondence with him, beseeching him to support the repeal\nof the Corn Bill, which he held to be the great danger to the country.\nThere was the Gladstone family at Liverpool, with whom he was greatly\ntaken--William could then have been but a boy of six (A.D. 1817).  Legh\nRichmond visited him at Glasgow, and Chalmers says, 'I had most\ncongenial talk with him, and am greatly humbled by the very superior\nattainments of other Christians.'  When Edward Irving, in hopeless\ndisappointment, was about to leave the country, it was Chalmers that\narrested him, having formed such an opinion of his pulpit gifts and\nnoble character that he engaged him as his assistant.  We have already\nnoticed some of the friends he met when engaged in his poor-law inquiry;\nto these we may add Robert Hall, the cleverest man in conversation he\never knew, but surpassed by John Foster in the depth and grandeur of his\nthoughts.  With Mr. Malthus, too, he had much congenial converse.  About\nthis time he found a close ally in Mr. Douglas, the proprietor of\nCavers, where he had been assistant in his youth, who became so well\nknown as a thoughtful Christian writer, and who placed more than one\nL500 in his hands to assist him in his schemes for St. John's.  Among\nother things that Mr. Douglas owed to Chalmers's example and influence\nwas the habit of systematic working.  Mr. Erskine of Linlathen was\nanother Scottish layman for whom he had remarkable regard, his\nspirituality of mind being to Dr. Chalmers most impressive and\nstimulating.  Mr. Erskine's work on the _Freeness of the Gospel_, though\nlooked on suspiciously by some very orthodox persons, was to Dr.\nChalmers very delightful. Afterwards Mr. Erskine adopted some views with\nwhich he could not sympathise.  With Lord and Lady Elgin he appears to\nhave been on terms of most intimate friendship. Mr. Colquhoun of\nKellermont may be added to the list of distinguished Scottish friends;\nand, besides these, there were his coadjutors in the St. John's\nundertaking, the members of his congregation, and nearly all the men of\nmark and Christian worth in the community of Glasgow.\n\nHis manner of life in Glasgow was as simple and regular as was possible\nfor one so full of occupation and so eagerly sought after by all sorts\nof people.  As a rule, the forenoon was set apart for reading and\ncomposition, and no one was allowed to intrude on him then.  But\nsometimes two or three rooms would be filled with persons waiting for\nhim, and it was remarked that, however overwhelmed, he had a kindly\nsmile and greeting for all.  The afternoon was devoted to pastoral work;\nthen, if possible, he had a walk in the Botanic Gardens or elsewhere;\ndinner was at half-past four, and very often he had some public\nengagement in the evening.  In the course of this busy day he found time\nto read aloud to his wife Milner's _Church History_ or some other such\nbook.  His hospitality was boundless. Breakfast, dinner, tea, and\nsupper, almost every day but Sunday, brought a succession of guests;\nfor, apart from his own large circle, hardly a stranger visited Glasgow\nwho did not bring an introduction, and whom he did not invite to his\nhouse.  His conversation generally was singularly genial, racy, and\nlively; whoever was in his society was charmed. Formal dinner-parties he\nheld in great abhorrence as a waste of time and worse, and very seldom\ndid he join them. For occasional recreation, his favourite resort was\nhis native Fifeshire; but in the suburbs of Glasgow and other parts of\nthe country he had dear friends with whom he delighted to spend an\noccasional day or more.  And, though no man had more respect for the\npoor, or more pleasure in his intercourse with them, he had an especial\ndelight in the society of families of the highest rank, when refinement\nwas blended with Christian worth, and the obligations of high station\nwere conscientiously and gracefully fulfilled.\n\n\nMost memorable in the history of Glasgow and in the history of Scottish\nChristianity were the eight years of labour spent by Dr. Chalmers in\nthat city.  Of individual cases of conversion the number was beyond\nreckoning; beginning with his dear friend, Thomas Smith, and ending with\na Camlachie weaver--a reckless infidel till Dr. Chalmers came across\nhim, but won by the simplicity and earnest sympathy which he showed in\nweekly visits during the months when he was dying of consumption.  And\nthe circumstances of his various converts were very different. The\nthoughtless young officer, who entered his church with the crowd as he\nwould have entered the theatre; the fashionable lady, whose curiosity\nled her to hear the great popular orator; the busy merchant, with no\nthought nor desire beyond material things; the aspiring student, bent\nonly on literary distinction--each person, arrested and brought to\nChrist by the force of his appeals, represented the many classes from\namong which, as Dr. Hanna tells us, it was the privilege of Chalmers to\ngather recruits for the Kingdom of Heaven.\n\nBut more than that: under Chalmers the tide of public sentiment turned\ndecisively to evangelical religion.  Before he came, evangelical\npreaching had been looked on as a combination of sour fanaticism and\nweak sentimentalism; under his preaching it attained its true rank and\nglory as the very essence of the Gospel message.  Before his time, as\nthe population of the city grew from year to year, thousands had been\nquietly allowed to fall away from all Christian observances, and to form\na community of paganism, leavening the city with carelessness and\ncorruption.  It was his powerful voice that roused attention to the evil\nand the danger, and organised the machinery best fitted to grapple with\nit. Previous to his time, even the most earnest of the ministers in\ntheir week-day ministrations had seldom gone beyond their own\ncongregations, or thought much of the careless and godless families\naround them; it was Chalmers that, by the emphasis he laid on the\nterritorial method, brought into operation that system of aggression\nwhich affords the only hope of arresting and reclaiming the outcast\nmass. Before his time infidelity was doing its deadly work among the\nmore intellectual and cultivated classes, and the spirit of indifference\nwas widely spread even where a formal profession of religion continued;\nit was in a large measure the influence of Chalmers that restored a\nliving faith in Christ and in redemption, and aroused concern in that\nclass of society for the life to come.\n\nStill more remarkably, perhaps, had Dr. Chalmers succeeded in inspiring\nmen and women in Glasgow, young men very emphatically, with the spirit\nof Christian service. His 'agency,' as he called it, resembled the\nfollowers of Saul, 'a band of men whose hearts God had touched.'  In\nafter years they formed the very _elite_ of the earnest Christian laymen\nof the West; and to this day, though all of them have passed away, their\nfervour and devotedness are still found in some of their children and\nchildren's children.\n\nNor had he failed to secure the esteem and affection of the great\ncommunity of Glasgow.  They honoured him personally, and they were proud\nof his greatness and fame. They were ready with their purses to support\nwhatever scheme he deemed it necessary to set on foot.  A more attached\nor warm-hearted company could not have been found anywhere than the\nthree hundred and forty friends who, ere he left, sat down together at\nthe largest dinner-party that had ever assembled in the city in honour\nof a single individual.\n\nWhy, then, did he abandon the field where his labours had been so\neminently successful?\n\nSimply because these labours had grown to such multiplicity and variety\nas to demand an expenditure of bodily and mental energy that could not\nbe continued.\n\nHis incumbency had lasted during eight years of his prime--from\nthirty-five to forty-three.  Happily he had not been prostrated by any\nsevere illness, and the systematic regularity of his life, with the\nattention he had given to diet, sleep, and exercise, had kept him from\nbreaking down. But who that thinks of all he was doing, the problems\nwith which he was grappling, the schemes he was working, the constant\ndemands of the pulpit, the incessant labours of the parish, the use he\nwas making of the press, the toil of his correspondence, amounting on an\naverage to fifty letters a week, the perpetual turmoil in which he was\nliving, amid crowds of visitors, and all the other fruits of unrivalled\npopularity, as well as the demands of an increasing and growing family,\nand his desire to keep up friendly intercourse with his brothers and\nsisters--can fail to see that the indefinite continuance of such a mode\nof life was more than could be thought of?  Had it continued much\nlonger, a breakdown was inevitable.  Very pathetically he wrote to one\nof his most intimate friends, Mrs. Coutts, of the constant feeling of\nexhaustion which at times was like to overbear him altogether.  Besides,\nChalmers was coming to see that through the press there opened to him a\nway of spreading his views and extending his usefulness which was as\nfull of promise as it was agreeable to himself.  But as a minister of\nGlasgow he could not do through the press what, with a little more\nleisure, he could fairly expect to accomplish.\n\nAnd then the prospect of an academic chair was very congenial.  It had\nbeen his earliest dream while the world was all before him, and it had\nnot yet lost its charm.  The tenacity of his affections was very\nremarkable.  Towards the close of his life we shall have occasion to\nnote the long-continued vitality of a strong but unavowed attachment\nwhich had sprung up in his boyhood, and it is no wonder that to such a\nnature the early vision of an academic chair continued to retain its\nbrightness and its fascination.  Once and again he had set it aside when\nit seemed to be within his grasp, because his Glasgow experiments and\narrangements were not ripe enough for the change.  Now, when the Glasgow\nwork was fairly consolidated; when the bustle and pressure of Glasgow\nlife had become almost unbearable; when, through the press, the prospect\nhad opened of impregnating not Glasgow only, but the whole empire with\nhis views; and when his own _Alma Mater_ had sent him a unanimous\ninvitation to fill a chair which formed a connecting-link between\nphilosophy and religion,--it is not wonderful that he made up his mind\nto the wrench that was to sever him from his Glasgow friends, and\nresolved to accept a chair in the university with which his earliest\nmemories were connected, and in which he could look forward to a career\nof peace and comfort to himself, and great usefulness to his church and\ncountry.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER IV\n\n                         ST. ANDREWS UNIVERSITY\n\n                               1823-1828\n\n\nOn the 9th November 1823 Dr. Chalmers preached his farewell sermon at\nGlasgow, and on Friday the 14th he delivered his introductory lecture at\nSt. Andrews.  He had not a single day of rest between the toils of the\noffice he laid down and those of the office he took up.  Four of his\nmost esteemed Glasgow friends had accompanied him to St. Andrews in\ntoken of gratitude for the past and good-will for the future.  At first\nDr. Chalmers was alone, and for a time he was the guest of his old\nfriend, Professor Duncan. It was not till the beginning of 1824 that\nMrs. Chalmers and his children joined him.\n\nSt. Andrews had been familiar to him from his boyhood, and its\nhistorical associations had dawned on him gradually, but with a firm\nhold, as such things usually impress boys.  Its traditions went back to\na remote antiquity. Fordun's legend of the Greek saint, Regulus, being\nordered by the Lord to carry the bones of St. Andrew into the\n'north-west corner of the earth,' was too obviously the offspring of\nsuperstition to be much regarded; yet it seemed to indicate that the\n'East Nook' was one of the earliest seats of Christianity in Scotland.\nIn pre-Reformation times St. Andrews had been the headquarters of the\nRoman Church, and, under successive archbishops, Patrick Hamilton and\nGeorge Wishart had been burnt at the stake for their noble testimony to\nthe Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Before their day, Peter Craw, a Bohemian,\nand thus of the same stock as the Moravian Church for which Dr. Chalmers\nalways had a very special regard, and other witnesses for the truth had\nperished in the flames.  It was here that John Knox first opened his\nmouth as a preacher; hither, too, he retired for a time at the close of\nhis life, and preached in the church when danger threatened him in the\nmetropolis. Here, also, Andrew and James Melville, Robert Rollok, Robert\nBruce, Robert Blair, Samuel Rutherford, Thomas Halyburton, and many\nother familiar names in the history of the country, had gathered wisdom\nas students, or imparted it as professors, or as ministers of the\nGospel.  The first university in Scotland had been set up at St.\nAndrews, and men like Buchanan and Melville had made it illustrious by\ntheir learning.  Nor was it very long since Chalmers himself had found\nthe powers of his intellect awakened as he sat in its mathematical\nclass-room.  It must have been with no ordinary feelings that he\nreturned as a professor to his _Alma Mater_, and girded himself for the\nduty of influencing its students; not, however, in the spirit or with\nthe aims of his early years, but under the influence of those intense\nevangelical convictions that, twelve years before, had revolutionised\nhis soul.\n\nDuring the first session, in preparing his lectures, he was truly from\nhand to mouth; to be but a few days in advance of the time for their\ndelivery was all that he could achieve. His second session, 1824-25, was\nregarded as the most brilliant in his academic career.  The number of\nstudents was more than double what it had ever been in former years, and\nthe enthusiasm was intense.  Chalmers was well aware of the fear\nentertained in some quarters that, amid the blaze of his popular\neloquence, he would not be able to attain to an academic level in the\nmore solid qualities of thinking and exposition of thought, appropriate\nto a university.  But in point of fact there was more than enough of\nsolid thought and ingenious speculation in his lectures to do away with\nany such impression.  Eloquent they often were, nor did he scorn the aid\nof imagination and illustration in handling the topics of his course;\nbut his main object was to exercise the minds of his students, and to\nset them thinking upon his themes.\n\nAt the very outset, he disabused his class of the idea that moral\nphilosophy was the same as mental philosophy. Moral philosophy was the\nscience of ethics, the science of duty, and, in his view, it ought to\nembrace duty in all its relations, and to make use of all the light that\ncould be brought to bear on that high theme.  In particular--and here\nwas the peculiar feature of his course--he desired to make the fullest\nuse of what had been communicated on this subject by supernatural\nrevelation.  He justified this method of proceeding by an illustration.\nIf natural philosophy were divided into two courses, and if one of them\nshould relate to terrestrial objects and such parts of astronomy as\nmight be prosecuted _without the telescope_, it would be strange indeed\nwere the professor to make no allusion to that instrument, and to\nignore, or even repudiate, all the light which it threw on the general\nscheme of things.  So also, in investigating the science of ethics, it\nwould be an extraordinary thing if no use were made of the Christian\nRevelation, supposing that its authenticity could be established as a\nrevelation from heaven.  Natural theology would form an important branch\nof his subject; but, in its very nature, natural theology was an\nincomplete and inadequate science.  Following the light of nature, it\nproved the insufficiency of that light; it created the thirst and the\nlonging for more light than it could itself supply.  This further light\nrevelation brought in.  He held moral philosophy to be the study that\nought immediately to precede that of theology; without theology it was\nincomplete.  It would be no part of his course to set forth at full\nlength the evidences for the Christian Revelation, but he would give a\ngeneral view of them; he would show at least that there was a _prima\nfacie_ presumption in favour of the divine origin of Christianity; and,\ntherefore, that it was consistent with the principles of the Baconian\nphilosophy to make use of its light in dealing with the great questions\nof moral obligation.\n\nIn fact, Chalmers in this matter took ground precisely opposite to that\nmore recently taken by one of his countrymen--the munificent founder of\nthe Gifford Lectures. According to Gifford, it becomes us to investigate\nthe whole subject of natural theology and moral obligation without the\nslightest reference to any alleged supernatural revelation. This he held\nto be the sound, impartial, unprejudiced course of true philosophy, and\nthe best way of attaining to simple, absolute truth.  In the view of\nothers, this is like the act of a man blindfolding himself before\nentering on a difficult investigation; or of a man walking in sparks of\nhis own kindling, while, if he chose, he might be at work under the\nbright influence of electric light.\n\nOne might have thought that, after finishing his first course at St.\nAndrews, Chalmers would have held himself entitled to a long rest.  But\nas soon as the session was ended, he set himself, during the fortnight\nthat intervened, to prepare for the General Assembly.  The question of\npluralities, the question of pauperism, and the question of the amount\nof time to be spent by students in theological study were to be before\nthe house, and Chalmers was interested in all.  On one of these\noccasions he came into collision with Dr. Inglis, the leader of the\nAssembly; but, even on a point of order, Chalmers was equal to him, and\nin a division, he carried his motion.  At the close of the Assembly, on\nthe invitation of Mr. Leonard Horner, he took part in a meeting in\nEdinburgh on behalf of a then infant institution--the School of Arts.\nThe motion which he made on that occasion was seconded by Sir Walter\nScott. This was the only occasion on which these two eminent men\nappeared on the same platform and were associated in the same work.\n\nThe Assembly is past, but the time of rest has not yet come.  Dr.\nChalmers hurries back to Glasgow.  Now that he has got breathing-time,\nhis heart returns to the great experiment which he had begun there, and\nan unrestrainable eagerness takes possession of him to help it on.  The\nnext six weeks are spent in incessant labour in the old field.  In\nlooking back on this period he remarked in his peculiar phraseology, 'I\nthink that I never spent a season of more crowded occupancy.'  On his\nway to Glasgow he took Perth, where he preached a missionary sermon on a\nweek-day, the collection amounting to L81, 8s.  In Glasgow he preached\nsteadily in the chapel of ease, and he had the great satisfaction,\nthough of course it was but a temporary one, of adding four hundred to\nthe sittings let, no doubt to accommodate the many persons who were bent\non hearing him during the few weeks of his stay.  During these six weeks\nhe preached ten times in the chapel, writing all the lectures, and\napparently the sermons too--seven of his texts being from the Epistle to\nthe Romans, part of the exposition afterwards published.  Apart from\nspiritual impulse and spiritual fruit, his six weeks in Glasgow\nbenefited the chapel to the tune of L200.  In the midst of his incessant\npublic work he contrived to write to his wife a full journal of all his\nproceedings, and he gave her most explicit instructions to give the\nchildren a feast of strawberries on the arrival of each letter, and to\nlet them know that they were from him.  With all his greatness and\neloquence, it is amusing to find him showing that nervousness in the\nprospect of a speech at a public dinner which but few men have been able\nto overcome.  'It kept me anxious all day.'  One is reminded of Sir\nRobert Peel, who could hardly eat anything at public dinners when a\nspeech was forthcoming, but sat in misery, crumbling his bread.  'One\ntouch of nature makes the whole world kin.'\n\nA source of greater trouble and annoyance arose after his Glasgow visit\nin connection with a promise to deliver a missionary sermon at Stockton,\nnear Manchester.  After his arrival, he found that an advertisement had\nbeen issued from which it appeared that the sermon would come in as a\nsort of interlude in a vast musical entertainment, in which an orchestra\nof at least a hundred persons, supported by drums, trumpets, bassoon,\norgan, serpents, violins without number, violoncellos, bass viols,\nflutes, and hautboys would take part.  Chalmers was most indignant.  He\nfelt it an affront to himself, to be stuck up like a mountebank, as if\nhe had come to help in the entertainment of a pleasure-seeking audience.\nBut not less did he feel it a prostitution of his office, as if the\nAmbassador of Heaven, dealing with men on their state before God and\ntheir need of reconciliation, were to be mixed up with such a clatter.\nHe was on the verge of refusing to preach at all.  But remembering his\npromise, he compromised the matter by refusing to appear except at the\ntime when his sermon was delivered. 'I stopped in the minister's room\ntill it was all over.  Went to the pulpit, prayed, preached, retired\nduring the time of the collection, and again prayed.  Before I left my\nown private room, they fell too again, with most tremendous fury, and\nthe likest thing to it which I recollect is a great military band on the\nCastle Hill of Edinburgh.'  In spite of all, the collection exceeded\nL400.  In telling the story, as he often did to his friends, he said\nthat they hardly let him alone even while he was preaching; 'the fellows\nwere tuning their trombones in my very ear.'\n\nNovember 1825 found him again at his work in St. Andrews, with a better\nprepared course, and a very numerous class.  Notwithstanding the labours\nof the recess, no symptom of exhaustion appeared; on the contrary, he\nseemed to thirst for further labour, and whereas the subject of\npolitical economy had been considered to fall to the professor of moral\nphilosophy, he intimated that in the following session he would make\npolitical economy the subject of a separate course.  A numerous class\nwas enrolled, but instead of teaching the subject by lectures, he\ntreated it by means of a text-book.  The text-book was Dr. Adam Smith's\n_Wealth of Nations_, on portions of which the students were examined,\nthe professor occasionally adding explanations or little dissertations\nof his own, or referring to more modern books which gave the latest\naspects of the subject.\n\nIt should be added that Dr. Chalmers always opened his class with\nprayer.  This was an innovation in a class of philosophy.  The prayers\nwere short and pithy, often bearing on the subject of the preceding\nlecture, and the language was often felicitous, and even sublime.  Of\nthe like quality were the prayers he offered when he became a professor\nof divinity. Many of these will be found in the _Institutes of\nTheology_.\n\nBut at St. Andrews he was very far from confining himself to academic\nlabours.  He could not look round him without feeling that, small though\nthe town was, it was not less in need than crowded Glasgow of efforts to\ndispel its spiritual darkness, and awaken young and old to the things of\neternity. The place had fallen from its high estate; it was no longer\nlike the St. Andrews of those days when, fragrant with martyr memories,\nit formed one of the chief centres of evangelical influence in Scotland.\nThe first form of pastoral activity to which Dr. Chalmers betook himself\nwas that of a Sabbath-school teacher.  As soon as he had leisure after\nthe first session, he marked out for himself a district of the town in\nthe neighbourhood of his house, visited the families, and invited the\nchildren to attend a class of his own on the Sunday evenings.  For that\nclass he made as careful, though not as elaborate, preparations as for\nhis students in the university.  By and by it increased to rather\nburdensome size.\n\nMeanwhile, another class of young persons engaged his attention, and the\nSabbath school was handed over to others. It had been suggested to him\nthat great good would result from a students' class, from gathering\ntogether, on Tuesday evenings, such students as desired to receive from\nhim religious instruction of the same kind as they had been accustomed\nto receive in their fathers' houses before they came to college.  The\nfirst winter of this meeting, five students came for the purpose.\nChalmers instructed them and dealt with them, gave them books for\nSabbath reading, examining them as to their contents, and at the same\ntime taking a book of his own, _Scripture References_, as a kind of\ndoctrinal text-book of his expositions and examinations.  Next year, the\nnumber was about a dozen.  In the third year, the number became so great\nthat his dining-room was crowded with students.  One of them remarked\nafterwards that they learned more of Christian ethics at these meetings\nthan from all his class-room lectures on moral philosophy.\n\nIn some instances, the fruit of these meetings was very remarkable.\nAccording to the testimony of Dr. Duff, who was one of Chalmers's young\nmen, the students of St. Andrews, previous to his coming, were a godless\nlot.  To make a profession of piety was to incur universal derision. Nor\nwere the divinity students much better; some of them, indeed, were more\nnotorious than other students for impiety, immorality, and riotous\nrevellings.  Dr. Chalmers was the instrument of a great revival.  In\n1823-24, some of the students formed themselves into a missionary\nsociety, which held meetings next session in the room of a remarkable\nman, John Urquhart, one of those saintly youths whose early death puts\nan end to the boundless promise of their student careers.  Dr. Chalmers\nhad already become president of a missionary society, embracing\ndifferent denominations. At the monthly meetings of this society, which\nbecame so large that they had soon to be held in the Town Hall, he gave\naddresses on missionary topics, not only communicating information, but\nalso pressing the motives and encouragements to missionary effort,\nanswering objections, and gathering from the reports on the state of the\nheathen confirmations of Scripture, and evidences of the divine origin\nof Christianity.  A university missionary society had now become\npossible, and its career began in 1825-26 under more favourable\nconditions than could have been looked for.  The blessing of God rested\non it, for it furnished some of the first and noblest missionaries that\nthe Church of Scotland sent into the foreign field.  The first was the\nRev. Robert Nesbit, who spent many laborious and effective years at\nBombay.  Before Dr. Chalmers left St. Andrews, another of his students,\nMr. Adams, had begun his missionary career.  In 1829, Chalmers presided\nat the ordination of Alexander Duff, now one of the brightest names in\nthe record of missions.  The Rev. A. Mackay and the Rev. David Ewart\nfollowed, and John Urquhart was preparing to go when illness and death\narrested his career.  A more beautiful or promising springtime of\nmissionary activity could hardly be imagined.  And the same course that\nhad thus been begun at St. Andrews was also being followed in Edinburgh.\nOn 27th December 1825, the Edinburgh University Missionary Association\nwas founded, chiefly through the influence of John Wilson, afterwards so\nwell known as Dr. Wilson of Bombay.  Chalmers has sometimes been called\na man of one idea, and in some minds the notion got hold that all his\ninterest was in home missions, and that he looked with comparative\nindifference on foreign.  It would be more correct to say that he was a\nman of all manner of ideas, but that he worked out only one idea at a\ntime.  In that large heart there was room not only for the welfare of\nScotland, but of the whole world too.  His identification of himself\nwith the missionary cause, at a time when many derided it, was an act of\nhigh moral courage.  So was another act, his taking sittings for his\nfamily in the dissenting chapels, that they might be nourished with\nevangelical food, not then to be obtained in the Established Church.\nOccasionally he would attend these chapels himself, both on Sundays and\nweek-days; not disdaining the devotional services of a pious mechanic at\nthe prayer-meeting, and deriving far more help therefrom than from the\ndreary ministrations either of the town church or that of the college.\n\nIn one respect Dr. Chalmers's course did not run smoothly at St.\nAndrews.  He got into loggerheads with his colleagues on the subject of\ncollege finance.  In dealing with the funds of the college, it had been\nthe practice of the Senatus to lay aside a certain amount for general\nexpenses, and to divide the balance as a supplemental salary among the\ndifferent professors.  Chalmers was not clear that this was a legitimate\ncourse, and for some years he refused to receive his share of the\nsupplemental fund, which accordingly accumulated until it amounted to\nsome L700.  Reflecting as this refusal did, or was supposed to do, on\nthe honesty of his colleagues, it gave him more pain than any other\npublic duty he was ever called to perform.  After he had left St.\nAndrews, the university commissioners having looked into the matter,\nrecorded it as their judgment that there was no good reason why he\nshould not accept of the sum standing at his credit; and as Dr. Chalmers\nhad desired only that the matter should be settled by competent\nauthority, he accepted the money.  But nothing could exceed his surprise\nand indignation when he found, in the published report of the\ncommissioners in 1831, a statement that 'the principal and professors\nappear to have made these appropriations without any authority.'  In a\nletter addressed to the commissioners, and published in 1832, after\nquoting their judgment in his own case, he said he could not divine what\nthey really thought of these appropriations--whether they were honest or\nfraudulent.  'If you think them wrong, how is it that to me you have\ncalled the evil good?  If right, how is it that to your Sovereign you\nhave called the good evil?'\n\nDuring his five years' incumbency in St. Andrews, he issued two volumes\nfrom the press.  The first was the third and concluding volume of _The\nChristian and Civic Economy of Large Towns_.  Among the topics embraced\nin this volume were the Poor-Laws and the Combination-Laws.  The\nparticular aspect of the Poor-Laws with which he dealt, and which he\nmost thoroughly condemned, was the application of the poor-rates, as in\nEngland, to supplement the wages of ill-paid labourers.  Though kindly\nmeant, this arrangement, he held, was an invasion of the relation\nbetween master and men so ruinous, and involved a bounty to the masters\nso unjust, that no toleration ought to be found for it.  This was also\nthe general opinion; and the practice was discontinued by law.\nAccording to Dr. Chalmers's biographer, his exposure of the practice\nformed a powerful contribution towards its removal.\n\nIn regard to the Combination-Laws, which imposed severe and stringent\npenalties on any united movements of workmen for increasing their wages,\na bill for repealing them had been introduced and carried by Mr.\nHuskisson, whose efforts to free industry from the fetters of Protection\nwere hailed by Dr. Chalmers with great delight.  Unfortunately, the\ncarrying of this measure into law was accompanied by certain deplorable\nexcesses on the part of some classes of workmen, who did not understand\nhow to use their new-found liberty.  Dr. Chalmers strongly upheld the\nrighteousness of the repeal of the old laws, mainly on the ground that\nwe ought not to manufacture crime out of acts (such as workmen's\ncombinations) which the natural conscience does not condemn.  But with\nequal firmness he denounced any interference with the freedom of labour,\nespecially when men on strike coerced and persecuted those that might be\nwilling to work.  The experience of seventy years has not materially\nchanged the position.  'Strike, if you please,' is the voice of reason\nand justice to workmen; 'but leave those who do not concur with you at\nperfect freedom to do as _they_ please.'\n\nThe other publication of this period was a book on Literary and\nEcclesiastical Endowments.  It was devoted chiefly to the case of the\nScottish universities.  Among the reforms which he advocated, a foremost\nplace was given to the raising of the standard of scholarship for those\njoining the university.  Though apparently disregarded at the time, it\nwas seen, whenever serious attention began to be given to the state of\nour universities, that this was indeed the most important change to\nbegin with.  What Dr. Chalmers proposed was, that an entrance\nexamination should be instituted, and that a gymnasium, or, as we now\ncall it, a secondary school, should be attached to each of the\nuniversities, for instruction that would qualify for the entrance\nexamination. Modern opinion has so far transcended the modest proposal\nof Chalmers, that instead of a preparatory school in each university\nseat, the demand is now for adequate secondary schools scattered over\nall the land.\n\nIt was a very congenial thing for Chalmers to advocate in this way the\nelevation and ample equipment of our universities.  His old love of\nscience and general culture had never died in him, although he had\nlearned to give them a secondary place, and to feel profoundly that the\nfirst duty and the chief interest of man concerned his relation to the\ngreat God, without whom nothing could be great, nothing strong.  But the\nspirit of Chalmers was stirred within him as often as he thought of the\ngreat leaders of science, and their splendid achievements in astronomy\nand in other departments.  The very name of Newton sent a thrill through\nevery fibre of his being, and roused the desire to follow in his steps,\nas well as to see every youth around him inspired by his spirit, and by\nall that was noble in his example.  Speaking of the universities of\nEngland, which were more successful than the Scottish in cultivating\nparticular branches, but gave less complete attention to learning as a\nwhole, he said, 'We cannot conclude this passing notice of the\nuniversities of England without the mention of how much they are\nennobled by those great master spirits--those men of might and high\nachievement--the Newtons, and the Miltons, and the Drydens, and the\nBarrows, and the Addisons, and the Butlers, and the Clarkes, and the\nStillingfleets, and the Ushers, and the Foxes, and the Pitts and\nJohnsons, who within their attic retreats received that first awakening\nwhich afterwards expanded into the aspirations and triumphs of loftiest\ngenius.  This is the true heraldry of colleges.  Their family honour is\nbuilt on the prowess of sons, not the greatness of ancestors.'\n\n\nIt remains for us to take a glance at some of the more miscellaneous\nengagements of Chalmers during this period, including his journeys, his\nspeeches in public, the new friendships he formed, his spiritual\nprogress, and his letters to his family and friends.\n\nIn the autumn of 1826, after his hard work in Glasgow, Dr. Chalmers\ntreated himself to the rare luxury of a ramble in the south of Scotland.\nThe character of the man was singularly shown in the objects that\nattracted him as he proceeded from place to place.  In the neighbourhood\nof Kelso, he stopped his gig opposite Roxburgh Castle, and running up to\nit, feasted his eyes, even in the midst of rain, on an old-remembered\nscene--'one of the most glorious panoramas I ever beheld, where the\nblended beauties of Teviot and Tweed were concentred upon the environs\nof Kelso and the Palace of Fleurs, with the seats and plantations of\nother grandees.'  But it was places with an historical association that\ncharmed him most.  The church of Anwoth, Samuel Rutherford's early home,\ngreatly delighted him. The church, which was like that of Kilmany, but\nsmaller, still remained, but a new one was in course of erection; the\nmanse had just been pulled down.  Sir Walter Scott could not have more\nemphatically denounced such Gothicism, and the soul of Chalmers\nsympathised deeply with some of the masons that had refused to\nperpetrate the barbaric act, and had been dismissed from their\noccupation in consequence. To see Rutherford's 'witnesses,' he went up\namong the hills and inspected the stones which he once called to witness\nagainst some of his parishioners who were indulging in amusement on the\nSunday.  Not less enthusiastic was he at Kirkmabreck, where Dr. Thomas\nBrown, the son of the minister, was buried.  At Dumfries he visited Mrs.\nBurns, the widow of the poet, with whom he had a pleasant conversation,\nand whom he was pleased to see so comfortable. Among the gentlemen whose\nacquaintance he made was Mr. Cunninghame of Lainshaw, a well-known\nwriter on prophecy, and Mr. Buchan of Kelloe, in Berwickshire, whose\nhouse was 'just delicious.'  When the panorama of Berwickshire suddenly\nburst on him, he was overwhelmed. Perhaps what strikes one most in his\naccount of this and other journeys is his readiness to be pleased, his\npower of finding enjoyment in everything.  There is not a single cynical\nremark in all his narrative, not a flout, nor a grumble, nor a bitter\nword; he is always happy.\n\nIn May 1827 he went to London to open the new church of Mr. Irving in\nRegent Square.  This took place on a Friday; the prayer which Mr. Irving\noffered was forty minutes in length, and it was an hour and a half ere\nChalmers was allowed to begin.  He preached again on the Sunday, the\ncrowd comprising Mr. Peel, Lord Bexley, Lord Farnham, Lord Mandeville,\nMr. Coleridge, and many other notables.  At this time he made the\nacquaintance of Mr. Coleridge, with whom he spent three hours at the\nGillmans' house in Highgate; but while he marvelled at the flow of\nconversation, he said he could only catch occasional glimpses of what he\nwould be at.  He had a pleasant talk in the House of Commons with Mr.\nPeel, who showed a great interest in his views on pauperism, the college\ncommission, and likewise in his sermons, all of which he said he had\nread.  He had some intercourse with Macaulay, and heard Brougham; saw\nalso Sir Francis Burdett (father of Lady Burdett-Coutts), a conspicuous\nradical politician of the day.\n\nAmong home friends, Chalmers remained as simple, unsophisticated, and\nkindly as before.  'Of all men,' said Mrs. Grant of Laggan at this time,\n'he is the most modest, and speaks with undisguised gentleness and\nliberality of those who differ from him in opinion.  Every word he says\nhas the stamp of genius; yet the calmness, ease, and simplicity of his\nconversation is such, that to ordinary minds he might appear an ordinary\nman....  He is always powerful, always gentle, and always seemed quite\nunconscious of his own superiority.'  About the same time, Mrs. Grant\nreceived a visit from her friend, Sir Walter Scott, and it is\ninteresting to observe the resemblance she saw between the two men. 'His\ngood-nature, good-humour, and simplicity are truly charming.  You never\nonce think of his superiority, because it is evident he does not think\nof it himself.  He, too, confirmed the maxim that true genius is ever\nmodest and careless.'\n\nIn the autumn of the same year he paid his first visit to Ireland.  He\nhad been asked to preach, and crowds as usual thronged to hear him.  He\nwas greatly interested in the Giant's Causeway and the surrounding\nscenery, and seems to have relished the new aspect of character which\nIreland furnished.  But the place which had the deepest interest for him\nwas Gracehill, a Moravian settlement, where his wife had been educated,\nand in the cemetery of which was the tomb of her mother.  To be on the\nspot where his mother-in-law, whom he had never seen, departed this\nlife; to converse with the physician that had attended her in her last\nhours; and to walk through the school-house where his wife had received\nher education, thrilled his susceptible nature; it was with reluctance\nthat he tore himself from these 'bowers of sacredness.'  We can hardly\nconceive a warmer or more delicate tribute to his wife, or a clearer\nevidence of his affection for her and her family.\n\n\nWe have already adverted to some of his appearances in the General\nAssembly, but to these we must now add a remarkable pleading, in 1828,\nin favour of the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts.  The royal\nassent had just been given to a bill repealing these Acts, but so vital\ndid the matter appear to Dr. Chalmers, that he proposed that the\nAssembly should present a humble Address to his Majesty, expressing its\nsatisfaction that it was no longer requisite to take the sacrament as a\nqualification for civil office.  In his speech he compared the old law,\nviewed as a buttress to the Established Church, to those wooden props\nwhich one sometimes sees leaning obliquely against the walls of a\nhouse,--creating the impression that when a house needs such props, it\nis one of the craziest in the street.  Yet he was careful to affirm his\nhigh regard for an established church in itself, apart from such\nmiserable buttresses.  His motion was lost by 123 votes to 77, but in\nspirit the Assembly agreed with him.\n\nAs he was making his speech, his eye met that of Edward Irving, who was\nsitting opposite him, and who was wild on the opposite side.  Irving was\nthen delivering lectures on prophecy in Edinburgh to enormous audiences.\nAlready he was manifesting symptoms of that disordered judgment which\nultimately carried him so far astray, and Chalmers was sorely troubled.\n\nAs to his dealings with his own family, the same warmth of heart\ncontinued to show itself toward them which his earlier years had\nmanifested.  When his sister Isobel, next younger to himself, was dying,\nin the middle of his first session at St. Andrews (January 1824), he\ncharged himself with her case as if it were his chief interest, and for\na twelve-month wrote letter after letter to her, pressing on her with\nequal tenderness and earnestness all that bore on her spiritual welfare.\nHe was greatly cheered to learn that she was full of peace and joy in\nbelieving, and able to sustain with cheerful patience the sore pains\nthat accompanied her illness.  Her life closed with the closing year,\nand with her declaration that Jesus was fulfilling to her His latest\npromise, for He was now coming to receive her to Himself.\n\nVery beautiful, too, was his spirit to his mother.  Now that he lived at\nSt. Andrews, he could see her often.  In 1826 her last remaining\ndaughter was married, and she was left alone.  Deaf and lame, she was\ncut off, to a large extent, from intercourse with others.  Yet her son\ncould write: 'What a season of delight and of ripening for heaven has my\nmother's old age turned out to her, who, in the absence of all foreign\nresources, enjoys a perpetual feast in the happy repose of her spirit on\nthat Saviour whom she trusts--that God whom she feels to be reconciled\nto her!'  The dear old woman wrote of herself to her eldest son, James,\nin her seventy-seventh year: 'Since I last wrote to you I have had\nseveral severe complaints.  I am very frail and very infirm; but what a\nblessing it is that my memory and the faculties of my mind are as active\nas if I were twenty!  I bless God that it is so.  I feel a pleasant\ncontentment and peace of mind that the world cannot give nor take away.\nI amuse myself with working and reading.  God is very good to me, who\ngives me a contented and happy frame of mind; and I trust my God will\nnever leave nor forsake me, that when death comes, He will also be with\nme, and give me good hopes through Jesus Christ our Lord.'\n\nIt was her son's privilege to be much with her during her last illness.\n'My mother's has been to me by far the most impressive deathbed I ever\nattended.  The predominant feature of it has been the deep and immovable\ntrust of her spirit upon the Saviour.  This has been growing apace for\nsome years, and it shed a singular and beautiful light on the evening of\nher days.'\n\nIt could not have been said of Dr. Chalmers that they made him the\nkeeper of the vineyards, but his own vineyard he had not kept.  How like\nthe Apostle he was in being jealous over himself with a godly jealousy\nwill appear from such extracts from his journal as this: 'I live as if\nin exile from God, in a dry and thirsty land where no water is. Erred in\nlevity with Mr. Duncan in our reading-room; more kind and hospitable to\nMr. Dwight than formerly on a similar occasion; marvelling little of God\nwhen moving through His delicious air upon our ride, and in the midst of\nHis unnumbered beauties.  Oh that I could associate with everything the\nfirst great Cause of all things!  Absolutely nothing of the serious or\nsacred in me when sitting among eighteen immortals in the evening.  What\nan exclusion of religion from the world's companies!  Give me wisdom and\nprinciple, O God.  Oh! let me redeem the time, and give myself to the\nwork of an entire and spiritual Christianity!'\n\nSometimes we find an entry in his journal: 'Fasted somewhat this\nday,'--so eager was he to leave no means of spiritual quickening unused.\nBut still we find severe judgment against himself.  'Old things are not\nwholly passed away: the love of literature _for itself_, and the love of\nliterary distinction, have not passed away.  Let me love literature as\none of those creatures of God which is not to be refused, but received\nwith thanksgiving.  Let me desire literary distinction, but let my\ndesire for it be altogether that I may add to my Christian usefulness,\nand promote the glory of God; then, even without these, I would be a new\ncreature. The impression of my defects is not such as to overwhelm me,\nbut stimulate me.'\n\nDuring his St. Andrews incumbency, Dr. Chalmers had been offered various\noffices, notably that of professor of moral philosophy in the University\nof London.  To none of these offers did he accede; but when, on 31st\nOctober 1827, the Magistrates and Town Council of Edinburgh unanimously\nelected him to fill the chair of theology in the university there, he\ngladly accepted the office, the more especially that it had been\narranged that he was not to enter on his new duties till November 1828.\nIt was a trial to him to part with the calm and quiet he had enjoyed at\nSt. Andrews, and again plunge into a vast and bustling community like\nthat from which he had escaped five years before, and which had left\nlittle more than 'the dazzling recollection of a feverish and troubled\ndream.'  But theology was a higher department than moral philosophy, and\nEdinburgh was a centre of wider influence than St. Andrews.  His course\nwas clear; nevertheless, in his closing lectures, he assured his\nstudents that nothing in what was before him was fitted to displace them\nfrom his recollections; but, on the contrary, from his individual\nacquaintance with them all, he would ever regard his connection with\nthem as a more tender relationship than he could hope to enjoy with the\nstudents of Edinburgh.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER V\n\n                          EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY\n\n                               1828-1843\n\n\nIt was but natural for Chalmers, in entering on his new duties as\nprofessor of divinity in the University of Edinburgh, to rally all his\nenergies for a task so important--to be performed, too, in so commanding\na sphere.  The course of theology through which he had to conduct his\nstudents occupied three sessions, and for each consecutive winter it was\nnecessary for him to produce a fresh set of lectures. Happily the\nsubjects discussed in his first session were already familiar to\nhim--natural theology and the evidences of Christianity.  What was\nnecessary for him in this session, was to expand, complete, and combine\nmaterials that, in a very limited measure, he had already used at St.\nAndrews.\n\nA greater contrast can hardly be imagined than the divinity class-room\nunder his predecessor and under himself. The last professor was a\nstriking illustration of what the essential dulness and lifelessness of\nModeratism could produce when matured and crowned by old age and\ninfirmity. Two years before the appointment of Chalmers, a deputation of\nstudents, including the late Principal Cunningham and Dr. Wilson of\nBombay, had waited on the professor, requesting him (but in vain) to\nprovide a substitute, as his voice could not be heard.  Naturally the\nattendance had fallen to a fraction, and utter lifelessness prevailed.\nWith the appointment of Chalmers, an enthusiasm sprang up unprecedented\nin the history of the university.  'The introductory lecture,' says Dr.\nHanna, 'was delivered amid rapturous applause, and, with scarcely any\nsensible abatement, the excitement of that first meeting was sustained\nthroughout the whole of the succeeding session.'  Besides the regular\nstudents of the church, a very large body of amateurs attended the\ncourse.  From these the professor exacted no fee; but at the end of the\nsession, through the Rev. Robert Morehead, an episcopalian clergyman,\nthey asked his acceptance of a sum of money, and, in an elaborate\naddress, expressed the delight and benefit with which they had listened\nto the course.\n\nIn subsequent years, Dr. Chalmers re-wrote his divinity lectures, and\nafter his death these were published in two volumes, entitled,\n_Institutes of Theology_.  Besides delivering his own lectures, it was\nhis practice to comment on his textbooks,--Butler's _Analogy_, Paley's\n_Evidences_, and Hill's _Lectures in Divinity_, his notes on these now\nforming a separate volume of his _Posthumous Works_.\n\nMost Calvinistic treatises on systematic theology start from the divine\npoint of view, setting forth the nature of God; and, on the basis of His\nSovereignty, explaining his relation to man.  Chalmers preferred to\nstart with the actual condition of man, the diseased and disorganised\nstate into which he had fallen, and to rise from that to the provision\nwhich God had made for his recovery through Jesus Christ.  It is not\ndifficult to see what led him to prefer this order.  In his course of\nmoral philosophy, he had come to an abrupt and impassable barrier.\nNatural ethics gave abundant proof that man's moral nature was\ndisordered, and that he had lost fellowship with God; but it threw no\nlight on the awfully important questions how that nature was to be\nhealed, and how that fellowship was to be restored.  The answer to these\nquestions, as Chalmers often insisted, must come from a higher source.\nIt was tantalising to a teacher of moral philosophy to have to leave man\nin this predicament, and to be restrained from dwelling on the response\nof revealed theology to his eager questionings.  And hence, when\nrevealed theology became his theme, Chalmers was eager to set forth at\nonce the point of junction between the two theologies, to show how the\nrevealed took man up at the point where nature left him; in a word, to\nbring the remedy of revelation into connection with the disease of\nnature. If, in general, this order is more acceptable to Arminian than\nCalvinistic divines, this was not Chalmers's reason for preferring it.\nWe have seen that the sovereignty, the all-sufficiency and universal\noperation of God, was the first theological truth that took a powerful\nhold of his mind, even before he became reconciled to evangelical\ndoctrine.  That hold it retained ever after.  The root of Calvinism, or,\nwe should rather say, of Paulinism and Augustinianism, was planted at\nthe beginning in the very heart of his being.\n\nBut, from the eminently practical character of his mind, it was not his\nhabit to put the higher doctrines of Calvinism in the forefront of his\npreaching, or even of his theology. Man must be dealt with as a\nresponsible being; his responsibility must ever have its place beside\nGod's sovereignty.  It would be ruinous to handle either of these\ndoctrines in such a manner as to destroy or even impair the force of the\nother.  The combination of the two was one of the great objects of his\ntheological teaching.\n\nChalmers's style of theological discussion was very unlike the common.\nIt was not fashioned on the anvil of the schoolmen.  There was a\nremarkable combination in it of the philosophical and the popular.  His\nmind was deeply philosophical, delighting in first principles, and eager\nto concatenate truth, to establish comprehensive laws, to reconcile\napparently conflicting doctrines, and to bring what seemed unreasonable\ninto harmony with reason.  But his style was so diffuse and flowing that\nhe appeared to want the exactness and correctness of a philosophic mind.\nMoreover, he could not confine himself to the strictly intellectual\naspects of theology; he could not but include its moral and practical\naspects.  In bringing out the practical bearings of doctrines, he was\nliable to become somewhat declamatory.\n\nAnother peculiarity was his fondness of illustration, the product, as it\nseemed, of the poetical rather than the philosophic faculty.  The result\nwas that, as a philosophic theologian, Chalmers hardly got justice.  And\nsince his day philosophic theology has passed into a quite different\ngroove.  He was just beginning to know something of German philosophy\nwhen he died.  He was greatly interested in it, and had he survived, he\nwould in all likelihood have given much of his attention to it.  But he\ncould only have known it at second hand, and any discussion of it in\nthese circumstances must have been of but secondary weight.  And now\nthat the German standpoint has become so common, the theology of Dr.\nChalmers, as well as that of his successor, Principal Cunningham, has\nfallen into the background.  But it would not be easy to say how much is\nmissed by even philosophical students when they give the go-by to his\nwritings.\n\nThe academical and other honours conferred on him had more respect to\nhis position as a preacher and a philanthropist than a professor of\ntheology.  In 1830 he was appointed one of her Majesty's chaplains for\nScotland, the letter from Sir Robert Peel in which the announcement was\nmade to him saying emphatically that the honour was conferred in\nconsideration of his high character and eminent acquirements and\nservices.  At the Disruption, when he ceased to be a minister of the\nEstablished Church, he resigned this appointment.  It was but the other\nday that it transpired that her Majesty wished him to continue to hold\nit.  But such was his conscientiousness that, though the salary was\nplaced at his credit by the Queen's Remembrancer till his death in 1847,\nno part of the salary was ever drawn either by him or his family.  In\n1834 he was elected a corresponding member of the Royal Institute of\nFrance, and in the following year he received the degree of D.C.L. from\nthe University of Oxford.  Such honours as these last were without a\nparallel in the case of any Presbyterian minister. About the same time\nhe was elected a Fellow, and thereafter a vice-president, of the Royal\nSociety of Edinburgh.  Among other honours, he was asked by the\nBridgewater Trustees to write one of their eight treatises on natural\ntheology, the subject assigned to him being 'The Adaptation of External\nNature to the Moral and Intellectual Constitution of Man.'  This essay\nwas afterwards merged in his work on _Natural Theology_.  In his visits\nto Oxford and Cambridge he received almost unbounded attention from the\nmost distinguished men in both universities, and in his intercourse with\nthem he had much enjoyment.  At Cambridge he could not restrain his\ndelight at being entertained in the college of Newton--a name which held\nan extraordinary place in his regard.  In recognition of his appointment\nas a corresponding member of the French Institute, he visited France in\n1838, and read a paper to the Institute on the 'Distinction, both in\nPrinciple and Effect, between a Legal Charity for the Relief of\nIndigence and a Legal Charity for the Relief of Disease.'\n\nThe right treatment of pauperism continued to exercise his mind and to\ndraw forth his testimony on every available occasion.  In 1829 he was\nsummoned to London to give evidence before a Parliamentary Committee on\nthe Irish Poor-Law.  His view was ever the same.  A compulsory rate\ncreated a spirit of dependence, and thereby tended to the increase of\npauperism and the degradation rather than the elevation of the people.\nIt was often said that comfort tended to the improvement of character.\nHis belief was the very opposite; it was character that tended to the\nincrease of comfort.  His success in Glasgow led him to believe that the\nsame system would succeed in Ireland.  He had sought to stimulate\nfriendship and kindliness among all classes, so as to induce them to\nhelp one another in times of need; nothing had had a greater effect in\ndiminishing pauperism.  This was far too valuable and efficient a weapon\nto be carelessly thrown away.\n\nBut to all his schemes for remedying pauperism there came a death-blow\nin 1844.  In 1840, Dr. Pultney Alison of Edinburgh, a medical\npractitioner of great eminence and not less benevolence, published a\npamphlet in which he drew a painful picture of the miserable condition\nof the poor, especially in many parts of Glasgow and Edinburgh, and\nstrongly urged the necessity of an ampler provision for them, secured by\nlaw, though one result of this would be the increase of the cost of\nScottish pauperism from L150,000 to L800,000 per annum.  Chalmers did\nwhat he could to counterwork Dr. Alison.  When the British Association\nmet in Glasgow in 1840, he contributed a paper on the subject, and the\npublic interest was so great that the meeting where it was discussed had\nto be adjourned to a church. He delivered several lectures to his\nstudents, which were afterwards collected and published in a volume.\nBut the absorbing interest which had arisen in the Church question that\nwas now under vehement discussion, and other causes, chilled the\ninterest of the public in pauperism; and in 1844 a measure was enacted\nby Parliament, in opposition to the views of Chalmers.  To him it seemed\nthat even though an immediate improvement in the condition of the poor\nmight be thus obtained, it must be at the sacrifice of many of the\nvirtues that went to elevate them.\n\nIn the political world two great questions were agitating the community\nabout the time when Chalmers came to Edinburgh--Catholic Emancipation\nand the Reform Bill.\n\nChalmers was a strenuous advocate of Catholic Emancipation. It did not\nseem to him just, as a general principle, to exclude any body of the\npeople from a share in the government of their country on account of\ntheir religious opinions.  Not only so, but he had a strong conviction\nthat the effect of such exclusion was to create a prejudice against the\nreligion of their opponents and prevent them from giving an impartial\nconsideration to the arguments in its favour.  In urging his views at a\npublic meeting in Edinburgh, he rose to a height of eloquence that\ncarried his audience by storm.  As long as the Roman Catholics were\nexcluded from political privileges they would not listen to any\narguments against their faith.  But let this injustice be removed, let\nthem be admitted to the same platform as the rest of the community, and\nhe looked for a change.  And what might they not expect if the Bible\nwere to become a familiar book to their Catholic brethren, and they were\nto receive its lessons with open and candid minds?  The very thought\nseemed to open a most interesting and hopeful vista, well adapted to be\nexpanded and enforced by his gorgeous eloquence.  But even had he known\nthat expectations of this sort were groundless, he would still have\nadvocated emancipation simply as a matter of justice.\n\nOn the question of the Reform Bill he did not take the popular side.\nHis opposition to it comes on us as a surprise. We should have expected\nthat a man whose motto was 'Honour all men,' who had already befriended\nCatholic Emancipation and the repeal of the Corporation Test Acts, and\nwho was afterwards an advocate of the repeal of the Corn-Laws, would\nhave approved of the very moderate degree of political privilege implied\nin the ten-pound suffrage.  In a speech in the Presbytery of Edinburgh,\nDr. Chalmers once said: 'I have already professed myself, and will\nprofess myself again, an out and out and, I maintain it, the only\nconsistent Radical.  The dearest object of my earthly existence is the\nelevation of the common people, humanised by Christianity and raised by\nthe strength of their moral habits to a higher platform of human nature,\nand by which they may attain and enjoy the rank and consideration due to\nenlightened and companionable men.'  But, though he offered no active\nopposition to the measure, he did not approve of it.  In this he seems\nto have been actuated by various motives.  In the first place, he did\nnot think that this was the true way to elevate the people.  He had\nalways maintained that it was mainly by a moral and Christian education,\nby the cultivation of right principles and habits, that their true\nwelfare was to be secured, and he dreaded anything that might lead them\nto value material or political benefits more than this. Further, he had\na dread that any loosening of the old foundations of society might\nencourage a spirit of anarchy and recklessness which would ultimately\nbring the country to ruin.  He knew that such a spirit slumbered, and\nmore than slumbered, in many breasts, and he was opposed to any measure\nthat would give it the slightest encouragement. He did not reckon on any\nabatement of discontent from the extension of the suffrage, and did not\nbelieve that the political appetite would be satisfied with anything\nshort of a social revolution.  So great were his fears, that on one\noccasion he expressed his apprehension that if the government then in\noffice were to be removed, anarchy would immediately take possession.\nNothing would have surprised or alarmed him more than to be told that by\nand by a Conservative Government would bring down the suffrage to a much\nlower point than the then Reform Bill proposed.  But still more would he\nhave wondered had he learned that fifty years after his death, and under\nall these radical changes, so far from the country being abandoned to\nanarchy, the law-abiding habit of the people would be as strong as ever,\nand the foundations of society as firm.\n\nWhen the great question of the Corn-Laws came up at a later period,\nChalmers was in favour of the repeal; not chiefly for any important\neconomical results that he expected from that step, but because it\nwould, as he used to say, 'sweeten the breath of society.'  He would\nhave been surprised at the remarkable commercial results which the\nabolition of the Corn-Laws, and the institution of the system of Free\nTrade have produced on the resources of the country.\n\nIn addition to these considerations, another ground of his opposition to\nthe Reform Bill was his respect for an aristocracy and the influence of\nan aristocracy, as contributing important elements to the welfare of a\ncountry.  He held that 'in every land of law and liberty, with an order\nof men possessing large and independent affluence, there is better\nsecurity for the general comfort and virtue of the whole than when\nsociety presents an aspect of almost unalleviated plebeianism.'  But,\n'it is not for the sake of its ornaments and its chivalry alone that we\nwant the high rank of our aristocracy to be upholden.'  It was for the\nspirit that they circulated through all ranks--a more noble spirit, he\nthought, than either France with its 'Citizen King,' or the United\nStates with their universal social equality, could inspire.  In his\nintercourse with the aristocracy, it was the best and most congenial of\nthem that admitted him to their society, and nothing charmed him more\nthan to find a combination of rank and wealth with Christian principle\nand philanthropic activity, along with the charm of refined and gentle\nbut unassuming manners.  Such movements as the Reform Bill he deemed\nhurtful to the influence of the aristocracy, and therefore\ndisadvantageous to the welfare of the country.  It was a different set\nof aristocrats, and a different kind of policy he had to criticise when,\non occasion of his last visit to London, he gave evidence to a\nParliamentary Committee in connection with the hardships suffered by\ncongregations of the Free Church from the refusal of sites by\naristocratic landowners.\n\nUndoubtedly the main activity of Chalmers during his Edinburgh life was\nconnected with the work of the church. But before proceeding to this, it\nmay be well to advert to his literary activity, which, amid all his\nother occupations, was very remarkable.  We have already noticed his\nBridgewater treatise, afterwards reconstructed in his _Natural\nTheology_.  We have also noticed his volume on the subject of the\nPoor-Laws.  It was during this period that he completed and published in\nfour volumes his _Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans_, which had been\nbegun but not finished as pulpit discourses in Glasgow; regarding which\nthe late Mr. Isaac Taylor gave his judgment that they would probably be\nthe most enduring of his writings.  In this period likewise he collected\nand edited his whole works, amounting to the goodly number of\ntwenty-five volumes.  Of a large number of his pamphlets, introductory\nessays, articles in reviews, and other miscellaneous writings, our space\nallows us to say nothing.  But the work of this period which Chalmers\nhimself thought most of was, his treatise in two volumes on _Political\nEconomy_.  The subject had an attraction for him ever since his\nattendance on certain classes in the University of Edinburgh in\n1799-1801. His first published volume had been on one of its topics. In\nthe University of St. Andrews he had given a course of lectures upon it.\nIt may seem strange that, after his change of views and intense\nconsecration to spiritual work, he should still have felt so lively an\ninterest in a subject usually considered the driest and most secular in\nthe whole round of the sciences.  But, as he remarked in his preface,\nthere were two ways of presenting political economy.  One was merely to\nexpound its doctrines; the other, along with this, to consider its\napplications.  It was with this latter object in view that Dr. Chalmers\nbestowed so earnest attention on the subject.  On the doctrines of\npolitical economy, indeed, he held and expounded many original\nviews,--views which were treated with undeserved contempt by the\n_Quarterly Review_, but of which so high an authority as Mr. Stuart Mill\nwrote in a very different spirit.  Accepting it as the great aim of\npolitical economy to make the most of a country's material resources,\nand advance to the utmost the comfort and prosperity of its people, Dr.\nChalmers urged with great earnestness that all its methods were in\nthemselves incompetent to secure this end.  Without due provision for\nthe moral and spiritual nature, the true welfare and the true comfort of\nmen could never be achieved. Besides this, he held that society was ever\ntending to a condition which could not but defeat the very ends which\npolitical economy had in view.  It was the constant tendency of\npopulation to increase, and thus outgrow production--outgrow the\nprovision for the supply of its material wants. However much production\nmight be increased, it could not be increased in the ratio of\npopulation, so that at length a time must come when, in spite of every\nexpedient, destitution must set in.  The only safeguard against this was\nto raise the intelligence and the moral habits of the people, to inspire\nthem with a desire for a more civilised kind of life, to give them a\ntaste for higher enjoyments, and induce them to cultivate the industry,\nthe skill, and the self-control by which these might be attained.  But\nhow would this check population?  Dr. Chalmers was in this respect in\nsympathy with Malthus; he wished to check early and improvident\nmarriages, and the best means of doing this was to elevate the standard\nof living, so that marriage should be delayed until the means of\nreaching this standard were realised.  It must be owned, we think, that\nthis was a one-sided view.  There are undoubted moral risks of a very\nserious kind involved in the delay of marriage until an age when the\npassions have somewhat cooled down.  It was the habit of Chalmers to let\nhis mind dwell at one time on but one aspect of a subject, and not give\nfull weight to counterbalancing considerations.  Most readers will agree\nthoroughly with him in his view that improved taste and enlarged views\nmust bring in their wake increased comfort and a higher social standing;\nbut the system of political economy that rested on the Malthusian\nprinciple is not entitled to be placed much higher than other systems;\nand the only security for moral improvement lies in that Christian\neducation and Christian influence on which Chalmers laid so much stress,\nand which came not from political economy, but from the Gospel of Jesus\nChrist.\n\nWhatever we may think of his outlet from the insoluble problem of\npolitical economy, we must recognise with admiration his overwhelming\nsense of the value of this Christian education and training with a view\nto the highest welfare of mankind.  This indeed was the reigning idea of\nChalmers, pursued steadily throughout his whole life, alike in his\nsermons, his books, his scientific researches, his practical schemes,\nhis intercourse with his fellows, and, we may add, his communion with\nhis God.  If ever a life had unity, it was that of Chalmers.  To get men\nimpregnated with the spirit of Christ, and alive to the lessons of His\nGospel was, one way or other, his continual aim.  Not only did he strive\nto bring individual men into contact with Christ, so that they should\nreceive salvation, and partake of spiritual life, but he desired that\nall the influences that played on society should be such as to encourage\nthe Christian spirit and Christian habits.  National education without\nChristianity was a blunder not to be thought of. The rulers of the state\nought to encourage the church as the highest instrument of good to the\npeople.  The division of the country into parishes and districts was\nimportant as securing a more efficient ministration of Christianity to\nevery section of the community.  A rate-supported system of relief to\nthe poor was atrocious, because it hindered the exercise of Christian\nhabits, it deadened the very charity which it professed to promote.\nInterference with the spiritual function of the Christian church was an\nevil not to be endured; it was putting chains on the great instrument of\nthe world's emancipation; it was arresting the one great force through\nwhich all things were to be made new.  Daily, and almost hourly, it was\nthe prayer of Chalmers that he might be guided from above in all his\nefforts to bring individuals and the community alike under Christian\ninfluence and Christian habits.  And it was the practice of these\nprivate devotions that brought to him the wisdom, the strength, and the\npatience with which he laboured at the utmost stretch of his powers, and\nwithout intermission, for the Christian good of his country.\n\n\nBut we must now glance at some of his labours in connection with the\nchurch during the period now under review.  In 1832 we find him\noccupying the chair of the General Assembly, and signalising his year of\noffice by bringing about, in conjunction with Lord Belhaven, the Lord\nHigh Commissioner, the abolition of a practice of Sabbath dinners and\nSabbath breakfasts that had hitherto prevailed.  Next year, as a member\nof Assembly, he introduced the celebrated measure known as the Veto, but\nwithout success, his proposal being rejected by a majority of twelve.\nAs the evangelical revival advanced, dissatisfaction with the law of\npatronage advanced apace.  When the Reform Act came into operation, it\nwas felt to be but reasonable that as the voice of the people was now to\nbe heard in the choice of their rulers, it ought to be heard likewise in\nthe choice of their ministers.  To give them this voice was the object\nof the veto law.  Even under the law of patronage there was a provision\nby which the presentee must have a 'call' from the people; but it had\nnever been settled what this call meant, and in practice it had\ndegenerated into a mere form.  It was thought by some that it would have\nbeen wiser for the church to define the call; but the 'veto' was\npreferred, because it was held to imply a smaller measure of change.  It\nmade it the law of the church that if a majority of male heads of\nfamilies, being communicants, objected to the settlement of a presentee\nas their minister, the presbytery were not to take him on trial for\nordination.  It appeared to Dr. Chalmers that it would have been well\nfor the church before passing this law to have the authority of the\nLegislature in her support, but he was assured by lawyers of the highest\neminence, including the law officers of the Crown, that there could not\nbe a doubt as to the legal right of the church to enact this measure.\nNext year it was again brought forward, the motion in its favour being\nmade by the first Lord Moncreiff.  On this occasion it was carried, and\nbecame the law of the church; but events showed that it would have been\nwell had the advice of Chalmers been followed before it was enacted; for\nit was on the very question of the competency of the church, as by law\nestablished, to enact it that the great conflict arose which, ten years\nafter, rent the church in two.\n\nIt was impossible for Dr. Chalmers to be long in Edinburgh without\nhaving his attention turned to the religious wants of the people there.\nIn the course of a local controversy, carried on with much bitterness,\nregarding the 'Annuity Tax'--an unpopular impost for defraying the\nsalaries of the city ministers--a proposal had been made to abolish\ncollegiate charges, and thus reduce the number of ministers from\neighteen to thirteen.  Chalmers had strongly protested against the\nproposal, and claimed in the interest of the city that the ministers set\nfree from collegiate charges should be intrusted with new parishes,\nwherever additional churches were needed.  Under the Town Council,\nthings had been so managed that the incomes of the clergy had sunk to\nL400 a year; and the idea of new charges was unpopular, because the\nCouncil would have had to provide churches; this opposition grieved\nChalmers, and the only consideration that comforted him (as he wrote to\na friend) was the increased readiness of the friends of the church to\ncontribute for its extension.  For himself, he had hitherto been working\nin the Cowgate, in the hope that a new parochial charge would be set up\nfor that district.  But at the time (1834), the Town Council had refused\nto make the necessary arrangements for that purpose, although a few\nyears later, the parish of St. John's was erected, and Dr. Guthrie\nappointed to it.  Meanwhile, Dr. Chalmers resolved to transfer his\nattention to another needy and neglected district--the suburban village\nof Dean, or Water of Leith. He had good hopes that he would be able to\nerect a parochial economy there.  The Assembly of that year had\nappointed him convener of a committee for church accommodation; and in\nthe summer, besides encouraging local efforts, he tried to collect a\ncentral fund, for which in July he had made a beginning, having raised\nthe sum of L1677, 10s.  He had begun, as he said, with the higher kinds\nof game--dukes and marquises, but by and by he would come down to\nparochial associations and subscriptions of a penny a week.  He believed\nthat the 'ditchers' of the country properly cultivated might be found as\nproductive as the 'dukes.'  Anyhow, the moral influence would be\ngreater, because every man that gave a penny a week would be sure to\nfeel a lively interest in the cause.\n\nAnd this was the beginning of that great scheme of church extension\nwhich for several years engrossed his energies, as it proved also the\nforerunner of his Free Church Sustentation Fund, which has proved such a\nmonument of his financial sagacity and skill.\n\nFrom Glasgow an important proposal had been made by his friend and\nformer coadjutor, Mr. William Collins, that steps should be taken at\nonce to add twenty churches to the Established Church.  Thirteen years\nbefore, Chalmers had made the same proposal, but it had been scouted as\nvisionary.  Evidently his influence had been telling on the community.\nIt was no longer a devout imagination.  Mr. Collins and his friends\nresolved to take no steps in the way of building, till L20,000 should be\nsubscribed.  In the month of October that amount was realised.  The\nsuccess of this local effort gave a great impulse to the general scheme.\n\nThe proposal under the general scheme was, that the churches should be\nerected from voluntary contributions, but that the Government should\ngrant a small endowment to each congregation towards its annual\nexpenses.  To promote this part of the scheme, a deputation was sent to\nLondon, to solicit the support of the Prime Minister and other\ninfluential members of the Government.  At first it seemed as if Lord\nMelbourne and his cabinet would cordially agree to the proposal, but\nvehement opposition being offered to it by the dissenters, a change soon\ncame over the spirit of their dream.  Unwilling to offend an important\nsection of their supporters in Scotland, they resolved, as a sort of\ncompromise, to appoint a commission that should go over the country,\ntake evidence as to the amount of the existing provision for the\nreligious wants of the people, and report the results from time to time.\nIt was a great disappointment to Dr. Chalmers that in this way a long\ndelay would have to take place, and still more that the _personnel_ of\nthe commission showed a tendency unfavourable to the scheme.  The\ncommission buckled to their work, and at intervals issued reports which\nin the main bore out the contention of Dr. Chalmers.  Then it was\nannounced that a measure would be introduced; by and by it was said that\nthat measure was abandoned.  Dr. Chalmers and his friends were more\nfavourably received by Sir Robert Peel and other leading Conservatives;\nbut as they were not in power at the time nothing was done.  The\nvacillating conduct of the Whig Government made no favourable impression\non Chalmers: among his friends he was ready enough to proclaim, in his\nFifeshire dialect, 'I have a moral loathing of thae Whugs.'\n\nBut if there was disappointment from the Government, there was\nextraordinary encouragement from the people. In 1838 he was able to\nannounce to the General Assembly, as the fruit of four years' labour,\nthat there had been added to the Establishment nearly two hundred\nchurches, and that upwards of L200,000 had been contributed for their\nerection.  It was a result wholly unprecedented, and on all hands was\nregarded with amazement, and as a most wonderful testimony to the\neloquence and energy with which he had advocated the cause.  Worn out,\nand much in need of rest though he felt himself to be, he was induced to\nremain for some time longer at the head of the committee, and among\nother labours he added that of a tour over the whole country, in which\nhe advocated his plan with his usual eloquence.  But, in the Forties,\nthe shadow of the conflict between the civil and ecclesiastical courts\nhad fallen on the Extension Scheme, and it began to languish.  In the\ncourse of his convenership the progress of the undertaking had been as\nfollows:--\n\nIn 1835, 62 churches, L65,620   1   11-3/4\nIn 1836, 26    \"       32,359  12    6-3/4\nIn 1837, 67    \"       59,311   6    0\nIn 1838, 32    \"       41,183   1    1-3/4\nIn 1839, 14    \"       52,959  14   14-3/4\nIn 1840, 15    \"       36,055   8    8-3/4\nIn 1841,  6    \"       18,252   6    6-\n       ---           ------------------\nTotal,  222    \"     L305,741  11    3-1/2\n\n\nUnhappily, a painful controversy arose among the home-churches out of\nthe effort to obtain a national endowment for the new parishes.\nNonconformists, for the most part, viewed the application with great\ndislike, and opposed it tooth and nail.  It was bad enough, in their\nview, that a particular church should be maintained from the public\nfunds, and enjoy peculiar social privileges; but it was not to be borne\nthat it should receive a further grant of public money, of which, of\ncourse, nonconformists would have to pay their share.  The right way to\nsupport ministers, according to the New Testament, was by the voluntary\ncontributions of the people.  This, moreover, was a benefit to the\npeople themselves; it led them to take a greater interest in their\nchurch, and to attach more value to its ministrations. Thus it happened\nthat every church-extension meeting was more or less an anti-voluntary\nmeeting, the speakers who pled for the scheme vehemently upholding the\nprinciple of an establishment.  Of the younger men who fought on this\nground with Chalmers, none was more strenuous than the late Dr. Guthrie.\nBut Guthrie lived to change his view; and in an autobiographical\nfragment he tells us, that even when he was denouncing the voluntary\nsystem, in his secret heart he honoured, and even envied, the men whose\nliving was derived solely from the freewill offerings of their people.\n\nThe great objection of Chalmers to the voluntary system was that it was\ninadequate.  He held it incapable of making provision for the wants of a\nwhole community, and especially incapable of those aggressive efforts\nthat were needed for bringing in the masses who had fallen from the\nprofession of religion.  In planting churches, voluntaryism acted on the\nprinciple of attraction, aiming mainly at drawing in those who were more\nor less in sympathy with itself, and disposed to accept its\nministrations.  The theory of an established church, on the other hand,\ndemanded a provision for the whole of the population, and supplied a\nministry whose duty was to look after all the people, and ply them with\nthe offers and the injunctions of Christianity.  It was to make the\npractice and theory of the church in some degree to correspond that he\nhad undertaken and prosecuted his great church-extension movement.\n\nFor the nonconformists themselves he always cherished a profound regard,\nand a grateful sense of the invaluable service they had rendered to the\ncountry when the Gospel was seldom preached elsewhere.  Of this he had\ngiven signal proof when he took sittings in a congregational chapel for\nhis family at St. Andrews.  Nothing could have been further from his\ndesire than to drive nonconformists into a corner, or make them feel\nthat they stood in the way of his more comprehensive enterprise.  Yet\nmany of them did feel, and could hardly fail to feel, that they were\nobstacles to the working of a complete territorial scheme.  They were\nlike squatters or interlopers in a territory allocated and divided among\nregular settlers.  Unconsciously Dr. Chalmers stimulated a feeling among\nthe Established clergy that they, and they only, were the rightful\nspiritual guides of the people; a spirit of which he himself was wholly\ndestitute, but which was highly agreeable to human nature, and in many\ncases rears its arrogant head at the present day.\n\nIt was a favourite argument of the voluntaries that an established\nchurch could not be a free church; it was subject to the authority of\nthe state, and could not be free, as the nonconformists were, to obey\nits divine Head in all things.  This position Chalmers and his friends\nresolutely denied.  The alliance between church and state was an\nalliance between two independent powers, each of which was supreme in\nits own department.  In forming a connection with the state, the church\ndid not surrender one particle of its independence; it remained as free\nas ever to follow the guidance of its divine Head in every point where\nHe had expressed His will.  Nay, this freedom was expressly secured by\nthe statutes of the realm.  It knew to its cost how eager the rulers of\nthe country had often been to deprive it of its freedom, and at every\nimportant crisis of its history, when it renewed or revised its alliance\nwith the state, it had taken care that its freedom should be expressly\nconceded.  It was while the voluntary controversy was at its height that\nthe collision between the civil and ecclesiastical courts became acute,\nfor this very question, the independence and freedom of the church, was\nthe great bone of contention.  When the decisions of the Court of\nSession and the House of Lords were given, it became only too apparent\nthat, in the judgment of the civil courts, the church did not possess\nthe independence it had claimed. This was a dreadful, a shattering blow\nto Dr. Chalmers, and when it was authoritatively declared,\nnotwithstanding all his intense partiality for an established church, he\nat once severed his alliance with the state.  The main ground on which\nhe acted was, that a church enthralled to the state could never be that\nbeneficent instrument, that powerful moral agent, for which he valued\nit,--could never be the means of training the people in those holy ways,\nthose high moral and spiritual habits, on which their highest welfare\ndepended.\n\nIt was partly in order to advance his church-extension scheme, but more\nespecially to maintain the true theory of a church establishment, and\nthe church's independence in its union with the state, that he delivered\nin the Hanover Square Rooms, London, in April and May 1838, that series\nof lectures on the 'Establishment and Extension of National Churches'\nwhich raised his fame as an orator to its very highest pitch.\n'Nothing,' wrote the late Dr. Begg, who accompanied him, 'could exceed\nthe enthusiasm which prevailed in London.  The great city seemed stirred\nto its very depths.'  At the fourth and fifth lectures, an American\nclergyman who was present wrote that he found the room densely packed\nlong before the hour, and evidently for the most part by the higher\nclasses.  'Dukes, marquises, earls, viscounts, barons, baronets,\nbishops, and members of Parliament were to be seen in every direction.\nAfter considerable delay and impatient waiting, the great charmer made\nhis entrance, and was welcomed with clappings and shouts of applause\nthat grew more and more intense till the noise became almost deafening.'\n'The concluding lecture,' says Dr. Hanna, 'was graced by the presence of\nnine prelates of the Church of England.  The tide that had been rising\nand swelling each successive day now burst all bounds.  Carried away by\nthe impassioned utterance of the speaker, long ere the close of some of\nhis finest passages was reached, the voice of the lecturer was drowned\nin the applause, the audience rising from their seats, waving their hats\nabove their heads, and breaking out into tumultuous approbation.'\n\nAn event that somewhat disturbed the line of Dr. Chalmers's argument for\nthe freedom of the church had taken place just before he left Edinburgh.\nOn the 8th March 1838, the Court of Session, in giving judgment on the\nfamous Auchterarder case, found the veto law of the church to be illegal\nand _ultra vires_, and began to take steps for the reversal of all that\nthe church had done in connection with it.  The judgment had not become\nfinal, for it was subject to appeal to the House of Lords, and in his\nlectures Dr. Chalmers made no reference to it.  But when, in 1839, the\nHouse of Lords affirmed the decision of the lower court, and when Lords\nBrougham and Cottenham, in expressing their views, scouted alike the\nprinciple of the veto and of the independence of the church (although\nLord Brougham had at one time strongly commended the veto), Dr. Chalmers\nmade a full statement of his views in the General Assembly.  Before that\ntime he had been disposed to think that if the judgment of the Court of\nSession should be affirmed by the Lords, the best course for the church\nwould be to give up the veto, reserving power to judge of each case by\nitself, and act accordingly.\n\nIn such a case as that of Auchterarder, for example, where the presentee\nhad been vetoed by 287 out of 300 male heads of families and called only\nby two, the presbytery might have decided that in these circumstances\nthe call was really no call, and therefore the presentee could not be\ntaken on trial.  But, according to the views expressed by the judges,\nthis course would have been as illegal as the veto itself.  Dr. Chalmers\ntherefore moved that, while the Assembly would make no claim to the\ntemporalities of Auchterarder, they would still maintain the principle\nthat no minister be intruded on an opposing congregation, and that a\ncommittee be appointed to confer with the Government, in order to\nprevent any further collision between the civil and ecclesiastical\nauthorities.  A magnificent speech of three hours was delivered in\nsupport of this motion, which, after a long discussion, was carried by a\nmajority of forty-nine.  It has been remarked, that never was the\neloquence of Chalmers more Demosthenic than in his orations for the\nfreedom of the church.  And this intense regard for her freedom was no\nnew notion of his: so far back as 1814, in a speech in the Assembly on\nthe plurality question, he had maintained that 'the church had power to\nreject a presentee for any reason, or for no reason at all.'  To\nChalmers, the enforced intrusion of unacceptable presentees was not the\nonly, perhaps not even the chief, interference with the liberty of the\nchurch.  When it was decided that the church had no power to erect new\nparishes or to give their ministers the usual status of her clergymen;\nand, likewise, that she had no power to readmit into her pale any of\nthose who in former years had left it,--cases in which no shadow of\ntemporal interest was involved--it seemed to him that such restrictions\non her liberty were not only intolerable, but that they tended\ncompletely to shatter her efficiency.\n\nOf the four years of long and weary negotiation that followed the\npassing of this resolution, we have no space to write at any length.\nAlongside of negotiations with Government there ran a stream of\ndecisions both by the civil and church courts which greatly complicated\nthe situation.  New cases of intrusion occurred, pre-eminent among which\nwas the case of Marnoch, where the presentee was vetoed by 261 out of\n300 male heads of families, and had the name of but a single parishioner\nattached to his call.  For insisting on his settlement, the seven\nmembers of presbytery who took this course were first suspended and then\ndeposed.\n\nAs to negotiations with Government, a considerable share of the\ninterviews and correspondence fell to Dr. Chalmers.  With Lord\nMelbourne, the Prime Minister, he did not hit it off.  On a former\noccasion, as Chalmers himself told Dr. Gordon, when his lordship heard\nof a deputation from the Scottish church, he expressed a hope 'that that\nd--d fellow Chalmers was not among them.'  Unable to make anything of\nthe Whigs, Chalmers and his friends now turned to the Tories, who at one\ntime seemed friendly, but with them, too, negotiations finally broke\noff. In these negotiations there was a painful episode between Dr.\nChalmers and Lord Aberdeen.  A bill introduced by his lordship did not\ncome up to what Chalmers understood him to have promised, and he was\nunable to support it. Lord Aberdeen complained bitterly, and in the\nHouse of Lords accused the Non-intrusion Committee of giving an\nunscrupulous report of their conversations with him, and he believed\nthey had behaved in the same way to the Government. For Dr. Chalmers he\nhad a special gibe.  'A reverend gentleman, a great leader in the\nGeneral Assembly, having brought the church into a state of jeopardy and\nperil, had left it to find its way out of the difficulty as well as it\ncould.'  Evidently these were the words of a man who had lost his\ntemper, and forgot what was due in courtesy, to say nothing of charity,\nto absent men.  Unfortunately his son and biographer, Sir Arthur Gordon,\nhas made the matter worse by a vulgar charge against Dr. Chalmers, that\nhe was overborne by the violent men in the non-intrusion committee, and,\nbeing afraid of losing his leadership, succumbed to them, and had not\nthe moral courage to avow his change of opinion.  Dr. Chalmers was not\nin the habit of succumbing to any one, for no one stood more\nindependently on his own judgment; and, as to trimming and shuffling,\nhis whole life showed him to be incapable of such conduct.  The event\nproved who was in the right; Lord Aberdeen afterwards carried his bill,\nwhich proved a miserable failure.  As Dr. Donald Fraser has remarked, it\nhad to be given up as a nuisance.  And then, under a Conservative\nGovernment, came the abolition of patronage![3]\n\n  [3] Sir Arthur Gordon allows (1) that under the unworthy influence of\n      the then Dean of Faculty (Hope) Lord Aberdeen was induced to omit\n      certain provisions he had at first inserted; and (2) that the then\n      Lord Advocate (Sir W. Rae) said in public that the Government\n      measure would exceed in liberality even the liberal measure\n      proposed by the Duke of Argyll.  In the course of Sir Arthur's\n      narrative we find the astounding statement, that though Lord\n      Aberdeen sat as an elder in the Assembly from 1818 to 1828, he\n      never once received the Sacrament in a Presbyterian church!\n\nChalmers had now had experience of both the great political parties, and\nwith equally disappointing results. His grand project of a church\ncommensurate with the necessities of the country (so far as these were\nnot provided for by the nonconformists) was nearly as far off as ever.\nBut his experience in raising money for church extension gave him hope\nin another direction.  When he knocked at the door of the Whigs on\nbehalf of church extension he was refused.  When he knocked at the door\nof the Tories, he found that they might have endowed the church, but\nthey would have enslaved her.  They viewed the church 'as an engine of\nstate, not as an instrument of usefulness.'  He was now about to knock\nat the door of the people; and he cherished no little expectation that\nthrough them he would yet succeed in his scheme of making Scotland a\nspiritual garden.\n\nDr. Chalmers concurred cordially with the measures taken by the church\nto resist, or at least protest against, the encroachments of the civil\ncourts.  He approved of the Claim of Right as affirmed by the Assembly\nin May 1842.  He preached the opening sermon at a convocation of\nministers in November 1842, and was a leading counsellor at that\nremarkable gathering where from four to five hundred ministers pledged\nthemselves to leave the Establishment if no measure of relief were\npassed by the Legislature.  His view, as to the duty of the church, when\nno such measure of relief was provided, was as clear as day.  Amid the\nnumberless perplexities that for years past had caused such anxious\nconsultations and fears lest a wrong step should be taken, he found it\nan unspeakable relief that the path of duty in the last and most\nimportant step of all was so clear.  And so, on the famous 18th of May\n1843, Dr. Chalmers was at the side of the Moderator, who happened to be\nhis own colleague in the university, Dr. Welsh; the names of both were\nsubscribed to the Protest that was laid on the table of the Assembly;\nand when Tanfield was reached, and a General Assembly of the Free Church\nof Scotland was constituted, its first act was to call to its chair the\nman whose reputation throughout the Christian world was by far the\nhighest, and whose influence in bringing about the Disruption had been\nby far the greatest.  Regarding that Assembly, Chalmers wrote to his\nsister, 'Never was there a happier Assembly, with a happier collection\nof faces, than in our Free Church, with consciences disburdened, and\ncasting themselves without care and with all the confidence of children\non the Providence of that God who never forsakes the families of the\nfaithful.'\n\nAll must see, whatever their own opinion of the case, that it could only\nhave been considerations of extraordinary force that constrained Dr.\nChalmers to forgo that connection with the state which he had so long\nheld to be indispensable for the successful work of the church, and to\ncast her on the voluntary offerings of the people. From the hour when\nthe noble ambition to turn Scotland into a spiritual garden first filled\nhis soul, the aid of the state had appeared a sine quct, non to the\naccomplishment of this great object.  What then induced him to part with\nit?  Only because he was profoundly convinced that the subjection which\nthe civil courts demanded would prove fatal to its spiritual life and\npower, fatal to its spirit of enterprise and activity, fatal to that\nlargeness of heart and confidence of success which were necessary for\ngreat undertakings, and fatal to its own character as a consistent and\nfearless witness for the supremacy of the church's head.  If it should\nflinch in its hour of trial, it deserved to be flung aside as a\ndishonoured and useless thing.  If the decisions of the Court of Session\nand the House of Lords had been less extravagant, if they had even left\nto the church a vestige of power to give effect to the voice of the\npeople in the settlement of ministers, and in the other matters\ninvolved, Chalmers would still have clung to the connection of church\nand state.  It was simply the extravagance of the claims of the civil\ncourts to supreme jurisdiction that placed Chalmers among the leaders of\nthe Disruption, for he did not take the strong view that some of the\nother leaders took of the divine right of the question. Whether he was\nsanguine enough to hope that the Free Church disestablished would be\nable to do for Scotland all that might have been done by a free\nEstablished Church, he certainly believed that, in the circumstances,\nthe Free Church was by far the more likely body to grapple with the\nenterprise that had ever floated before him.  Writing to Sir George\nSinclair in 1841, he said, 'Looking to the Christian interests of\nScotland, I believe that more good could be done by the instrumentality\nof a disendowed church than by an established church exposed to such\ninterferences as those of the Court of Session during the last few\nyears.'  And, under this belief, what remained of his life was devoted\nto the building up and strengthening of the Free Church, in the earnest\nhope that much of the blessing for which he had longed and worked and\nprayed so intensely would in this way be realised for his country.\n\n\nFrom the heated atmosphere of public controversy we make a pleasant\ntransition when we accompany Chalmers on the visits he paid from time to\ntime to London and other places, and when we sit by him in the privacy\nof his home.  We see something of the spontaneous outflow of both mind\nand heart; we are charmed with his genuine humanity, his interest in\nlife, his humour and simplicity, and, in his devotional hours, with his\nprofound humility and intense aspiration after holiness.  He was not\nmuch of a traveller, and he lost not a little thereby.  All that he ever\nsaw of the Continent was Paris and its environs. Had it been his lot to\ngaze on the sublimities of the Alps; had he looked on the city of the\nseven hills, and wandered by the Po and the Tiber; had he pursued his\nway to Egypt and the East, and familiarised himself with those objects\nthat bore, in his own phrase, so much of the 'hoar of antiquity'; had he\nvisited Berlin, and Leipsic, and Halle, and Tuebingen, and become\nfamiliar with the working of the German mind, he would have experienced\nnew developments of soul and spirit, and cut off all ground for the\nestimate of Carlyle that he was a man of narrow culture. It is\nremarkable that the United States seem never to have come within his\nhorizon till about the very end.  But when he did travel, no man could\nhave enjoyed travelling more, whether his attention was turned to the\nobjects of nature or of art, or whether he regaled himself with the\nsociety of new and interesting friends.\n\nWith a loyal and lively remembrance of his family, he continued the\nhabit of writing journal-letters to his wife and daughters, giving the\nfullest details of all that he saw and heard.  Usually his journeys to\nLondon were occasioned by church business, and on these occasions he had\nlittle to say except of any interesting persons that he met.  But as he\ncame in contact with not a few of the greatest celebrities of the age,\nand invariably received much attention from them, these brief notices\nare very interesting. Sometimes he would quite captivate an Englishman,\nand lay the foundation of a lifelong intimacy and correspondence. With\nall the members of the Earlham family that he met (the Gurneys) he was\ngreatly taken; but one of them, Joseph John Gurney, became so attached\nto him, and so delighted with his conversation and character, that we\nmight almost apply to him the language of Scripture on the attachment of\nJonathan to David.  _The Chalmeriana_ of Mr. Gurney remind us of\nBoswell's _Life of Johnson_.  Quaker though Gurney was, there was but\none subject on which there was any serious difference of opinion between\nthem--the desirableness of a connection between church and state.\nGurney had given no little study to the 'evidences,' and his views\ncorresponded to those of Chalmers.  Of the gifts and mental power of\nChalmers he had the most exalted opinion; all the more was he struck\nwith his remarkable humility, his entire freedom from the airs of a\ngreat man.\n\nAnother new acquaintance with whom he was greatly charmed was the Rev.\nCharles Bridges, of Old Newton, Suffolk, the author of _The Christian\nMinistry_ and the _Exposition of the 119th Psalm_.  Of his visit to his\nhouse he said: 'The breath of heaven is here; without, a scene of beauty\nthat to the eye of sense is altogether delicious, and within, a\nsanctuary of love and holiness....  I never witnessed such closeness and\nefficiency of pastoral work as he exemplified in his addresses to the\nmothers of families. He makes a real business both of the Christianity\nof his own soul and the Christianity of his family and parish, watching\nover the souls of all as one who must give an account.'  It was the very\nsingular quality of Chalmers, that while he could hold kindred\nfellowship with so many kinds of men, it was with the holiest and most\ndevoted of God's servants that he found himself in closest sympathy. He\ncould find points of contact with Sir James Mackintosh on ethics, with\nMalthus on the law of population, with Daniel O'Connell on the Irish\npoor-law, or with Dr. Whewell on physics, because he had a genuine\ninterest in all their pursuits, and considered that they all had a\nbearing on the welfare of man.  But such pursuits were but outworks: the\ncitadel itself was under charge of men like Mr. Bridges. Their specialty\nwas to deal with the very essence and marrow of truth, and especially\nthat great redemptive scheme by which alone the world could be truly\nblessed; they lived under the shadow of the tree of life, whose leaves\nwere for the healing of the nations.\n\nIt was later in life (1845) that he made the acquaintance of Professor\nTholuck of Halle; but, though both were old men, there was all the\nwarmth and joyousness of youth in their short fellowship.  Dr.\nRutherfurd Russell, in whose house he met Tholuck, related that 'he\nseated himself on a low chair close to the learned German, and listened\nwith an air of genuine docility to all he said, throwing in a\ncharacteristic observation now and then, always, however, in the way of\nencouragement, never of contradiction....  Tholuck turned to his host,\nand said, in German, that he had never seen so beautiful an old man....\nThe result of the interview was an amount of mutual confidence and\nesteem, as deep and sincere as it was mutual....  The day before\nTholuck's departure, Dr. Chalmers called upon him, and found him at his\nmidday repast.  He sat with him only for a few minutes and said little,\nbut looked at him steadily, with an expression of constant interest and\naffection. He rose to take leave, and, instead of taking him by the\nhand, he threw his arms round his neck and kissed him, while \"God bless\nyou, my dear friend!\" broke with apparent difficulty from his\novercharged heart.  After he was gone, it was noticed that a tear had\ngathered in the eye of him who had received the apostolic benediction\nand seal of brotherhood from one he loved and venerated so much. His\nonly observation was a half-muttered, half-spoken, _Eben ein Kuss_--even\na kiss.'\n\nThe visits to London were not always on controversial business.  On the\naccession of William IV. in 1830, he formed one of a deputation from the\nChurch of Scotland appointed to present a congratulatory address.  He\nsaw many public men, and was introduced to a few.  His description of\nTalleyrand, then French ambassador, is graphic: 'I gazed with much\ninterest on the old shrivelled face, and thought I could see there the\nlines of deep reflection and lofty talent.  His moral physiognomy,\nhowever, is a downright blank.'  His letter to his family, giving an\naccount of the presentation, is full of little touches, showing, among\nother things, how well he appreciated the incidents that are specially\ninteresting to the female mind.  Far from desiring to magnify his own\nimportance, he dwells in a humorous way on the defects of his toilet.\n'My Geneva gown did not lap so close as I would have liked, so that I\nwas twice as thick as I should be, and it must have been palpable to\nevery eye at the first glance that I was the biggest man there--and\nthat, though I took all care to keep my coat unbuttoned and my gown\nquite open.  However, let not mamma be alarmed, for I made a most\nreputable appearance, and was treated with the utmost attention.'\n\nAfter being presented to the King, the deputation paid their respects to\nQueen Adelaide.  When she ascended the throne, 'the most beautiful\nliving sight,' says the Doctor, 'I ever beheld burst upon our delighted\ngaze.  The Queen, with twelve maids of honour, in a perfect spangle of\ngold and diamonds, entered the room.  I am sorry I cannot go over in\ndetail the particulars of their dresses; only that their lofty plumes\nupon their heads and their long sweeping trains upon the floor had a\nvery magnificent effect.... On each side the throne were maids of\nhonour, officers of state, the Lord Chancellor, a vast number of\nmilitary gentlemen, and, among the rest, the Duke of Wellington.'\n\nIn 1837, on the accession of Queen Victoria, he was intrusted with an\naddress from the University of Edinburgh, which, he tells us, after\nkissing her hand, he forgot to present till he was checked by one of the\nlords-in-waiting, when he turned and put it into her Majesty's hand.\nHis opinion of the young Queen is interesting to us, after sixty years'\nacquaintance with our Sovereign: 'A most interesting, girlish\nsensibility to the realities of her situation, with sufficient\nself-command, but, withal, simple, timid, tremulous, and agitated, that\nrendered her, to me, far more interesting, and awoke a more feeling and\nfervent loyalty in my heart than could have been done by any other\nexhibition.'\n\nIn the summer of 1833, after four years of almost incessant labour, he\ntreated himself to a two-months' holiday, in pursuance of an old\nambition which he had fondly cherished to visit all the cathedrals of\nEngland, and survey the country round them from the top of their towers.\nThere was hardly one of the cathedrals that did not in some way excite\nhis admiration.  Canterbury and Ely seem to have come in for a special\nshare.  Though black and rusty with age, Canterbury, with its tower\nbetween two hundred and three hundred feet high, and a fabric studded\nwith massy buttresses of high-wrought Gothic, was a splendid structure.\n'But my admiration, though high, was greatly heightened on seeing the\ninterior, which is the most perfectly beautiful of all I can recollect,\nconsisting as it does of a stately vista of confronting arches and\npillars, with an effect greatly enhanced by the contraction of the sides\ntowards the east end, and the dying away of the columnar vista into\nnarrower and narrower recesses.'  At Ely, 'aided by the printed guide, I\nstudied the whole of this elaborate and highly ornamental pile with a\nparticularity and a feeling of satisfaction greater than I had ever\nbefore experienced.... Expatiated over this noble edifice for hours....\nDined with Mr. Evans at four, but made one more round of the cathedral\nbefore dinner.'  On every occasion he was ready for the ascent of the\ncathedral stair, even where such a climb was unusual; once, he tells us,\nafter the guide had refused to go further, how he came on some jackdaws'\nnests on the steps, the owners being very much amazed at the sight of\nvisitors.  Nor did one climb in a day always suffice.  On 5th August he\nclimbed the tower of Boston Church in the morning, and that of Lincoln\nin the afternoon--the one 351 steps, the other 336.  At this time he was\nan elderly and not very lightly-built man of fifty-three.\n\nSome gentlemen's mansions, like Haddon and Chatsworth, were visited with\nmuch interest.  But Chatsworth, with all its wonders, did not impress\nhim so much as some other castles.  What he liked was a grand baronial\nresidence, befitting the time when the owner was really the head of his\npeople, ready for any expedition which the public interest required, and\nnot merely a landlord drawing his rents.  Places that had a connection\nwith great men were peculiarly attractive.  We have noticed his\nreverence for Trinity College, Cambridge, as the abode of Isaac Newton.\nKingston, near Canterbury, acquired a classic character, because the\nrector's wife was great-grandniece of Bishop Butler, and showed him a\nsnuff-box, a memorandum-book, and an annotated Greek Testament, which\nhad belonged to the author of the _Analogy_.[4]  In the immediate\nneighbourhood of Kingston was the church where Richard Hooker\nministered.  House and church were accordingly visited.  And when he\ncame to Sunderland, its great interest was that Dr. Paley had been its\nrector, and that he saw the study in which he wrote, the room in which\nhe died, and the field around which he took excursions on horseback.\nNewton, Butler, and Paley were among the very chief of Chalmers's\ninstructors and friends.\n\n  [4] When asked to record in this Testament his opinion of Butler, he\n      declined, because he did not feel worthy of the honour, but, being\n      pressed, he wrote as follows: 'Butler is in theology what Bacon is\n      in science.  The reigning principle of the latter is that it is\n      not for man to theorise on the works of God; and of the former\n      that it is not for man to _theorise_ on the ways of God.  Both\n      deferred alike to the certainty of experience, as being paramount\n      to all the possibilities of hypothesis; and he who attentively\n      studies the writings of these great men will find a marvellous\n      concurrence between a sound philosophy and a sound faith.  July 3,\n      1833.'\n\nNot less characteristic of the man were the free and friendly relations\ninto which he entered with some of the common people who were thrown in\nhis way.  Usually he travelled on the stage-coach, but occasionally he\nhired a carriage, and not unfrequently a gig, with the driver at his\nside.  He had the feeling that he would enjoy his holiday all the more\nif it were mingled with a little study. Accordingly we find that, when\npassing slowly in his gig over some monotonous part of the road, he\nwould pull from his pocket a grave book, like Mede's Latin Lectures on\nProphecy, and have a spell of theological reading.  But his eye seemed\nalways to be open to any object of interest, whether in the scenery or\nin the places he passed.  With his driver he entered into friendly\nrelations, although he sometimes found him a very dolt.  At Huddersfield\nhe hired a gig to carry him through some of the remarkable scenes of\nDerbyshire.  The driver was a grave, silent, and simple lad of\ntwenty-two, and he made a practice of taking him with him to the caverns\nand other places of interest that he visited.  At the Peak Cavern he had\nto change his coat and hat, 'and a worse coat or a worse hat I never saw\non the back or head of any carter or scavenger in the land, insomuch\nthat I was a spectacle to the children of the village, who shouted and\nlaughed behind me, and even the driver of the gig could not restrain his\nmerriment.  I always take him to the sights along with me; first,\nbecause I found a great ignorance of Derbyshire curiosities in\nHuddersfield, and I want to make him more enlightened and enlarged than\nhis fellow-citizens; secondly, because I always feel a strong reflex or\nsecondary enjoyment in the gratification of other people, so that the\nsympathy of his enjoyment greatly enhances my own; and thirdly, because\nI get amusement from the remarks of his simple wonderment and not very\nsagacious observations; and it has now passed into a standing joke with\nme, when leaving any of our exhibitions, that \"there is no such fine\nsight to be seen at Huddersfield.\"'  At Chatsworth, the Doctor gave the\nlad his hat and silver-headed cane to carry; he followed at a respectful\ndistance, while his master went before with a book in his hand, taking\nnotes of whatever was memorable.  He found afterwards that his\npicturesque appearance and unusual employment had excited much\nspeculation among other visitors as to who he was, and that the\nconclusion to which they all came was that he was a foreign nobleman.\nAt Matlock he parted with his driver, who, he found, could hardly read;\nhe warned him that many perish of lack of knowledge, and that he must\nlearn to study his Bible, which was able to make him wise unto salvation\nthrough faith in Jesus Christ.\n\nChalmers did not always show the same patience and consideration for his\nfellow-travellers.  Once, in Yorkshire, waiting at the door of the\ncoach-office, he found himself beside a herd of swine, whose motions and\noperations he studied with interest; on the top of the coach he found a\ncompany much of the same order--'fat and unintelligent, with only pursy\nand vesicular projections on each side of their chins, and a\nsuperabundance of lard in their gills, whose manners well-nigh overset\nme, overloading our coach with their enormous carcasses, and squeezing\nthemselves, as they ascended from various parts of the road, between\npassengers already in a state of compression, to the gross infraction of\nall law and justice, and the imminent danger of our necks.'  It was\nenough, he said, to make any man a Tory. Naturally, Chalmers had much of\nthe passion which bursts out in this bit of sarcasm; but, before the end\nof his letter, he feels that he has gone too far, his better nature\nasserts itself, and he gives utterance to a milder spirit.  'I feel it\nwrong to nourish contempt for any human being: \"Honour all men,\" is the\nprecept of Scripture.  We should not despise any of those for whom\nChrist died; and the tendency to do so is one of those temptations to\nwhich refinement and knowledge are apt to expose us, and which ought to\nbe resisted.'  The 'old Adam' was not extinct; but at the bottom of his\nheart Chalmers wished him destroyed.\n\nEven with a London barber he could have a merry time. To be sure the\nbarber began the fun, for he undertook, by clipping out all the white\nhairs and leaving only the black, to make his client look forty years\nyounger.  This greatly tickled the Doctor, and he proceeded to\ncompliment the barber's profession, inasmuch as, though he heard\nuniversal complaints of a bad hay-crop, his haymaking in the metropolis\nwent on pleasantly and prosperously all the year round. On the\ncompletion of the job, the man assured the Doctor that he looked at\nleast thirty years younger.  'I told him how delighted my wife would be\nwith the news of this wonderful transformation, and gave him half a\ncrown, observing that it was little enough for having turned me into a\nyouthful Adonis.  We parted in a roar of laughter, and great mutual\nsatisfaction with each other.'\n\nHis tour in France was undertaken in 1838, on occasion of his reading\nhis paper to the French Institute, and lasted about a month.  He was\nstruck with the airiness and brightness of Paris, and the apparent\nleisureliness of the people as compared with London; he remarked, too,\nhow inferior the equipages were to those of England.  Among other\npersons of mark whom he met with were Guizot, who told him that the\ncombination of the moral and economical was wholly unknown in France;\nMignet, Madame de Stael, and the Duc and Duchesse de Broglie, with all\nof whom, and many of their friends, he had most agreeable intercourse.\nThe duke had borne a distinguished part in political history; he was a\nsort of head of the Liberal party, but with the utmost aversion to noise\nand violence.  The duchess, a daughter of Madame de Stael, was a lady of\nmany gifts and of eminent piety.  The company of such persons,\naristocratic yet simple, cultured yet humble, and deeply interested in\nthe welfare of the people, was a great enjoyment to Dr. Chalmers.  But,\nvanity of vanities! a few months after his visit, the duchess was cut\noff by sudden illness, and the bright and happy home of the family made\ndesolate.  Dr. Chalmers expressed his sympathy in a very tender letter\nto the afflicted duke.\n\nAlong with Mr. Erskine of Linlathen, whom he found at Paris, he made a\nshort provincial tour, embracing Evreux, Broglie, Alencon, Lemans,\nTours, Orleans, Malesherbes, and Fontainebleau.  The scenery pleased him\nmuch; it was the kind he liked best, for he did not so much care for the\nsublimely picturesque as for fertile valleys and well-wooded uplands.\nWhile in France, he was much interested in the law of succession,\nespecially to landed property, and its effects on the condition of the\npeople.  He had supposed that, by giving rise to endless subdivision of\nthe land, the law must bring down the people to a very low standard of\nliving.  In point of fact, he found it less disadvantageous than he had\nthought.  On one point he was more convinced than ever, that to elevate\na country, moral and economical forces must go together.\n\n\nWe must now glance at Chalmers in his family and inner life during this\nbusy and trying period of his life.  A man who is forming new\nacquaintances by the hundred, and is constantly receiving the\nenthusiastic applause of thousands, is in no small danger of two\nthings--of letting his home-affections become somewhat languid, and of\nneglecting his inner life.  But in the case of Chalmers, we can find no\nevidence of either of these results.  Shortly before his departure from\nSt. Andrews, his domestic affections had been profoundly stirred by the\ndeath of his mother; and hardly had his first session in Edinburgh\nclosed, when he was called to follow to the tomb the remains of\nAlexander, his youngest and favourite brother.  His journal for 25th\nApril 1829 has the following entry: 'It was a large funeral.  The sun\nshone sweetly on the burying-place.  I was like to give way, when, after\nleaving the grave, I passed Mr. Fergus; neither of us could speak.  Oh\nthat God would interpose to perpetuate the impressions of this day! This\nis the fifth time within these few years that I have been chief mourner,\nand carried the head of a relative to the grave.  But this has been far\nthe heaviest of them all.'\n\nDr. Chalmers himself had an alarming illness in 1834, though, happily,\nit passed without serious results.  He had been at a meeting of the\nPresbytery of Edinburgh, at which he had vehemently opposed the proposal\nof the Town Council to curtail the number of the city ministers; and he\nhad been greatly excited by the thought that the real welfare of the\npeople should be obstructed and hindered by the very men who professed\nto be their friends.  It was on this occasion that he proclaimed himself\na Radical, the only consistent Radical among them.  'The dearest object\nof my earthly existence,' he then said, 'is the elevation of the common\npeople--humanised by Christianity, and raised by the strength of their\nmoral habits to a higher platform of human nature, and by which they may\nattain and enjoy the rank and consideration due to enlightened and\ncompanionable men.  I trust the day is coming when the people will find\nout who are their best friends, and when the mock patriotism of the\npresent day shall be unmasked by an act of robbery and spoliation on the\npart of those who would deprive the poor of their best and highest\npatrimony.  The imperishable soul of the poor man is of as much value as\nthe soul of the rich; and I will resist, even to the death, that\nalienation which goes but to swell the luxury of the higher ranks at the\nexpense of the Christianity of the lower.'\n\nDr. Chalmers was moved in the very depths of his soul--for the proposal\nof the Town Council was a blow at the ruling idea of his heart--and he\ndelivered himself of these sentiments with such overwhelming energy that\nhis friends at the moment trembled for the consequences.  As he was\nwalking homeward after the meeting, on hailing a friend and taking his\narm, he suddenly stopped short, and said he felt very strangely.  His\nsensations were giddiness, and a numbness on the right side, as if he\nwere going to fall.  It was but too evident that he had sustained a\nslight attack of paralysis.  When medical aid was obtained, it was seen\nthat the muscles on the right side of his face were slightly paralysed,\nand his speech somewhat affected.  Sensation over the right side was\nvery much impaired, but the mind was wholly untouched.  Rest and the\nordinary treatment soon restored him, and in a short time he was able to\nresume all his ordinary studies and avocations.\n\nBut the event in his personal history that touched him more than\nanything else during this period was the completion of his sixtieth\nyear, on 17th March 1840.  It was a favourite thought that the seventh\ndecade of life ought to be turned into a kind of Sabbath, and spent\nsabbatically, as if on the shore of the next world, or in the outer\ncourts of the heavenly tabernacle.  In the case of his mother the last\nyears of her life had had something of this character, and Dr. Chalmers\nlonged for a like experience.  Deep in his soul lay the desire for\ndirect and deliberate communion with God, for he not only believed in\nsuch communion as the greatest privilege of the human spirit, but he\nknew that it brought to the worshipper an actual communication of divine\ninfluence, so far as the creature was capable of receiving the divine.\n'Oh that my heart were a fountain of gracious things,' he wrote in his\ndiary on his sixtieth birthday, 'which might flow out with gracious\ninfluence on the heads of my acquaintances, and more particularly of the\nmembers of my family!'\n\nSo far as the seventh decade had been looked forward to as a time of\nrest, the hopes of Dr. Chalmers were wholly frustrated.  The seven years\nthat yet remained to him, if not the very busiest of his life, were\nyears of peculiar tension, anxiety, and disappointment--things far more\ntrying to the vital energies than work itself.  The Church Extension\nscheme had to be worked out at home under the depressing influence of\ndisappointment of Government help; and then came the crisis of the\nconflict with the civil courts,--the negotiations with Government, the\ntaunts of Lord Aberdeen, the sickness of hope deferred, and, finally,\nthe shattering of the national church.  Though the Disruption brought\nquieter times, it did not bring the rest and freedom from care for which\nChalmers longed; the entire fabric of the Free Church had to be set up,\nand especially the Sustentation Fund; his longing for rest was but the\nchase of an _ignis fatuus_ that seemed always to lead him deeper and\ndeeper into the fray.\n\nNotwithstanding all, however, as time advanced, and his fame became more\nand more established, no change ever took place in the simple and humble\ndemeanour of his spirit.  'I never saw a man,' said Joseph Gurney, 'who\nappeared to be more destitute of vanity, or less alive to any wish to be\nbrilliant.'  In one of his home letters he gives his reason for refusing\nall requests for his autograph: he could not bear anything that might\nimply his desire to be considered a great man.\n\nBut, though rest and leisure seemed further away than ever, Dr. Chalmers\nwas determined that his seventh decade should not altogether want its\nsabbatic character.  For this end, he resolved to make a far more\nsystematic and earnest study of the Scriptures.  In October 1841 he\nbegan two series of readings--a daily and a Sabbath portion.  To impress\nthe lessons of each passage the more on his mind, he made use of his\npen, and carefully recorded the first, freshest, and readiest thoughts\nthat the passage read suggested to him; not with any view to\npublication, nor with any idea of composing a commentary, but simply for\nhis own edification.  The Sabbath lessons, being a chapter for each\nSabbath day from the Old Testament and one from the New, were more\nelevated and spiritual than the daily; and his remarks were often in the\nform of a direct address to God.  This practice was continued with\nundeviating regularity, no matter where he might be, or however much\nengaged.  If the volumes in which he entered his remarks were not at\nhand, he would write them in shorthand, and carefully extend them\nafterwards.  In some of his meditations he would express in the frankest\nmanner the most hidden thoughts and feelings of his soul. It is\nremarkable that one who, in his ordinary intercourse with men, seldom\nunveiled his feelings, and did not appear in any special degree to be\nunder the influence of the unseen, should, nevertheless, in his\ncommunings with God, have shown such frankness and such an intense\ndesire for divine guidance, and grace to enable him to follow it.  Dr.\nHanna well remarks, 'Behind the outer history of his life there lay that\ninner spiritual history which made the other what it was.  His\ncorrespondence, his speeches, his published writings, and his published\nacts, which furnish such ample materials for unfolding the one history,\nare absolutely barren as to the other.  We know of no other individual\nof the same force and breadth of character who, in all his converse,\npublic and private, with his fellow-men, spoke so little of himself, or\nafforded such slender means of information as to his own spiritual\ncondition and progress; and yet it would be difficult to name another of\nwhose deeper religious experience we have so full and so trustworthy a\nrecord.'\n\nIt was the troubles of the church, and the profound responsibility\ntherewith connected, that so powerfully stimulated his desire for\nfellowship and guidance from on high. Only those who lived at the time\ncan realise the exceeding bitterness of the tone of many opponents,\nshown both by word of mouth and through the press; and their readiness,\nif any prominent churchman should make a slip, to pounce upon him and\nhold him up to the reprobation of the public. It is a mode of treatment\nthat has not yet become obsolete. Some sally of Dr. Chalmers's had in\nthis way brought a nest of hornets about him--'Yet I am supported in a\nway that is marvellous under every visitation.'  Under April 2, 1840, he\nwrites in his journal:--\n\n\n'An utter prostration of spirit from the speech of Lord\nAberdeen.'--'April 3.  Recovered my spirits, but not my spirituality.\n'June 8.  Sadly engrossed with the Dean of Faculty's charge against me.\nMy God, uphold me!'--'June 21.  Have not yet recovered the shock of Lord\nAberdeen's foul attack on me in the House of Lords.  May I live\nhenceforth in the perpetual sunshine of God's reconciled\ncountenance!'--'July 5.  A letter yesterday from Dr. Gordon, enclosing\none from Lord Aberdeen, which will require a strenuous exercise both of\nwisdom and charity.  My God, guide and govern all my movements!'--'July\n17.  Hurt by a report in the _Witness_ of Lord Aberdeen's saying in the\nHouse that after having brought the church into jeopardy, I had left\nthem to find their way out of it as they could.  Recovered from this.\nDesire to roll all over upon God.'\n\n\nAlongside of these appeals to God for grace and wisdom in public life,\nnumberless passages occur in which one knows not whether to admire more\nhis profound humility or the intensity of his aspirations for a more\nheavenly condition:--\n\n\n'1841, May 17.  Cannot but remark how I gravitate to ungodliness.  Why\nare my thoughts when alone and not studying so little occupied with God?\nAnd oh that in company I might appear more for His glory!  Assist me to\ndo this in my family, and let me watch my opportunities for doing\nChristian good....  Let me carry about with me a distinct confidence in\nforgiveness through the blood of Christ, and with earnest desire of\nshowing forth His praise and learning His doctrine, let me try how this\nconfidence will work in me.  The fruits of righteousness so produced\nwill arise from the sense of my own nothingness, and have Christ alone\nas their origin.'--'July 10. Am I not too light-hearted and too\nluxurious, and altogether too self-indulgent?  Certain it is that in and\nof myself I am altogether vile and worthless, and would need, in\ndependence on grace alone, to have more of watchfulness unto prayer,\nmore of self-denial, and a far more tender sense of the evil of\nungodliness than habitually and practically belong to me.'--'July 4.\nNever am I in a better frame than when dwelling in simple faith on\nChrist's offered righteousness, and making it the object of my\nacceptation.  O Lord, I pray for more and more of the clearness and\nenlargement of this view; and grant me the spirit of adoption.  Oh that\nI could attain the experience of him who says, \"I have believed,\ntherefore have I spoken\"!'\n\n\nOne is constantly reminded in reading the private journals of Dr.\nChalmers of the 119th Psalm, with its remarkable combination of\nprofoundest humility and intense and holiest longing for conformity of\nheart and life to the will of God.  And it does not surprise us to learn\nthat the text of Scripture which he felt to describe his own case most\ncorrectly was the verse (20), 'My soul breaketh for the longing that it\nhath unto Thy judgments at all times.'\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER VI\n\n                         NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH\n\n                               1843-1847\n\n\nGifted and mighty men though many of the leaders of the Disruption were,\nChalmers towered high above them all. With the multitude his illustrious\nname gave a dazzling _eclat_ to the movement; with the thoughtful the\nfact that a man of his sagacity, patriotism, and caution, and strong\nproclivity to an established church, should have thrown himself heart\nand soul into the non-intrusion cause, created the conviction that it\nmust be supported by very weighty considerations. What but the strongest\nsense of fatal injury to the church could have induced him, after\nelectrifying London with pleadings for a national establishment of\nreligion, to forsake his own, and become practically a voluntary?  No\nman felt his responsibility for the Disruption more deeply than\nChalmers; and no man laboured more assiduously in behalf of the Free.\nChurch, in the creation of which he had had such a share.  To the\nGeneral Assembly of 1843 he gave in the Reports of the Sustentation and\nBuilding Committees, both of which were very encouraging.  The months of\nAugust and September were spent in a tour to the east and north of\nScotland, on behalf of the Sustentation Fund. In October he attended an\nextra meeting of the General Assembly at Glasgow, opening it with a\nsermon from Nehemiah xi. 16.  In November he had to enter on his duties\nas Principal and Professor of Divinity in the Free Church Theological\nInstitution, now known as the 'New College.'\n\nIt was natural for him to be very much cheered by the numberless letters\nand visits of congratulation that came to the Free Church from every\nquarter.  When even those who had as voluntaries been his most\ninveterate opponents in his church endowment effort, came with their\nwarm and most brotherly salutations, a new hope of union sprang up that\nrekindled hope for the highest welfare of Scotland.\n\nSpeaking to the General Assembly held at Glasgow in the autumn of 1843,\nhe said:--\n\n\n'I confess to you that I was much interested by the arrival, by one post\nafter another, of those addresses and resolutions from various churches,\nof whose very existence I was not aware till I received their letters.\nAnd I think that every man, whose heart is in the right place, will be\ndelighted with such movements.  They are movements quite in my own\nfavourite direction, because one and all of them are movements of\nconvergency; or, in other words, movements which point in the first\ninstance to union, and, as soon as possible and prudent, I trust their\nlanding-place will be incorporation.  There is among them one very\npleasant address, signed by--I have not had time to count the\nnames,--but I believe some of the youngsters of my family tried a more\nwholesale method of arriving at a probable estimate of the amount of\nsupport thus given to the Free Church; instead of numbering, they\nmeasured it, and found it about seventeen yards long....  I have felt\nexceedingly delighted with these communications.  I must say that I\nconsider it as infinitely more characteristic of the religion which we\nprofess--the religion of peace and charity--that instead of each\ndenomination sitting aloft and apart upon its own hill, and frowning\nupon each other from their respective orbits, they should hold kindly\nand mutual converse, and see each other eye to eye, while they will\ndiscern, to their mutual astonishment, if not how thoroughly, at least\nhow substantially, they are at one.  I just conclude with observing that\nnow is the time to rally about the common standard all that is pure and\nvital in Protestantism; for now it is that we shall have to make head\nagainst a new form and revival of Antichrist, whether in the form of\nPopery--naked Popery, or Popery in disguise, even that Antichrist which\nthreatens to shake a most withering mildew over the whole of\nChristendom.'\n\n\nThe same views were expressed with equal emphasis at a general meeting,\nheld about the same time, in commemora tion of the two hundredth\nanniversary of the Westminster Assembly.  And when the Evangelical\nAlliance was projected, he wrote a pamphlet in its favour, expressing a\nstrong desire that it should be called the Protestant Alliance, and that\nit should have for its double object the protection and promotion of the\ncause of Protestantism; and, in his own familiar and favourite line, the\nwork of a great Home Mission.\n\nAmong the eminent strangers who visited Scotland about this time none\nexcited a livelier interest in Dr. Chalmers's mind than Dr. Merle\nD'Aubigne, who came in 1845, when in the full flush of his fame as the\npopular historian of the Reformation.\n\nAt the Disruption there was a vast amount of work to be done, for it\nwould have required more than seven hundred churches to accommodate all\nthe congregations that adhered to the Free Church.  There were, besides,\nmany cases of peculiar difficulty, caused chiefly by the refusal of\nproprietors to grant sites for churches and manses on their properties,\na refusal which on vast estates like those of the Duke of Sutherland or\nthe Duke of Buccleuch would have amounted to an absolute extinction of\nthe church.  Dr. Chalmers, however, under the influence of his strong\ndesire for a sabbatic decennium, kept clear of the ordinary work of the\nchurch, excepting the Sustentation Fund and his college lectures.  As\nfor the college itself, it was mainly in the hands of Dr. Welsh, until\nhis lamented death in 1845, when Dr. Chalmers felt constrained to become\nconvener of the College Committee.  Among other services, Dr. Welsh took\nin hand to provide for a college building, which it was proposed to\nerect from the contributions of twenty subscribers of L1000 each.  This\nwas a serious undertaking at a time when the wealthier friends of the\nchurch had been straining all their energies for the Building,\nSustentation, and Mission Funds.  But the whole sum was speedily\ncontributed in the way proposed, and though in the end the price of the\nsite and the cost of the building amounted to more than double the sum\nnamed at the beginning, the whole was ultimately provided.  Such\nliberality for college purposes was due in a great degree to the\nprofound regard in which Dr. Chalmers was held, and in a somewhat less\ndegree to his colleague Dr. Welsh.\n\nIt must be owned that Dr. Chalmers was not satisfied with the success of\nthe Sustentation Fund.  It had been adopted not only unanimously but\nenthusiastically by the whole church, and considering all that had to be\ndone for other purposes, it was marvellous that in the first year it\namounted to L68,700, enough to furnish fully L100 to six hundred\nministers.  That, however, was but two-thirds of the amount which\nChalmers had named as the minimum payment to each minister from this\nfund.  And, besides, there were many additional ministers to be provided\nfor, needed by the new adhering congregations; and moreover,--and this\nwas never absent from his thoughts--there was to be considered the vast\nhome-mission work needed in order to realise his lifelong desire to\novertake the whole spiritual destitution of the country.  It was the\ninadequacy of the Sustentation Fund to realise this further object that\nwas the chief cause of his disappointment.  Moreover, he found in the\nmachinery of his scheme a serious leak, which bade fair to ruin it.\nEvery congregation was to receive an equal dividend for its minister\nfrom this fund, whatever might be the amount of its own contributions.\nIn order that this provision might work satisfactorily, it was necessary\nthat congregations should make an equal effort for the fund. But it was\nsoon found that many congregations were steeped in selfishness, and,\nwhile drawing their equal dividend, their contributions were but a\nfraction of what they should have been.  Chalmers had calculated on a\nbrotherly spirit and a brotherly conscience, which he now found were\noften wanting. He became alarmed for the future, and proposed a\nmodification of the original arrangement, to the effect that no\ncongregation should receive from the fund more than its own contribution\nand a half more.  But it was too late.  The fund had been constituted on\nthe footing of an equal dividend, and there was a strong opposition to\nthe change.  Chalmers remonstrated by word of mouth and by pamphlets on\nthe 'Economics of the Free Church.'  All that the Assembly would allow\nwas that the new plan should be tried with new congregations.  But as\nthe new congregations were generally comparatively poor, the result was\nsomething like starvation to their ministers; and, after a short trial,\nthe plan was given up.  But no one could deny the serious nature of the\nevil that Chalmers had pointed out, and for many a long year there were\nperplexed discussions as to the remedy.  Even now, though the leak has\nbeen abundantly dealt with, it has not been quite overcome.  In his\nremonstrances, Chalmers showed more vehemence than was perhaps\nreasonable, considering that it was the defect of his own original\nscheme that caused the difficulty.  But his vehemence was due to the\nconviction that came home so strongly to him, that the Sustentation Fund\ncould not become the instrument of carrying out his dearly-cherished\nproject,--of recovering the whole waste-places of Scotland, and making\nthem parts of the vineyard of the Lord.  The thought saddened him, and\nit led him to speak more disparagingly of what the Free Church had\naccomplished, and what the Sustentation Fund had accomplished, than was\naltogether deserved.\n\nAfter experiencing three disappointments--from the Whigs, and the\nTories, and the Free Church, it might have been supposed that, all eager\nas he was for rest and quiet, he would now let the matter alone.  But\nno.  There remained one other step.  By an _experimentum crucis_, by a\ndemonstration of what, under the divine blessing, could be done by his\nscheme in as unfavourable a district as could be found, he might yet\nvindicate it in the eyes of all men; he might leave behind him a\nmonument which would be a perpetual rebuke of the languor and\nlistlessness of the church; a perpetual encouragement to similar\nundertakings, and a perpetual testimony to the maxim of John Eliot, the\napostle of the North American Indians, which he used often to quote,\nthat 'prayer and pains can do everything.'\n\nThis was the origin of the West Port experiment. Writing on 26th July\n1844, just fourteen months after the Disruption, to his friend Mr.\nLennox of New York, the munificent founder of the Lennox Library and the\nLennox Hospital, New York, between whom and Dr. Chalmers there had\nsprung up a very cordial friendship, he said: 'I have determined to\nassume a poor district of two thousand people, and superintend it\nmyself, though it be a work greatly too much for my declining strength\nand means.  Yet such do I hold to be the efficiency of the method with\nthe divine blessing, that perhaps, as the concluding act of my public\nlife, I shall make the effort to exemplify what as yet I have only\nexpounded.'\n\nTo prepare the way and interest the public in his scheme, he delivered\nfour lectures, in which the methods and advantages of territorial\nschools and churches were set forth with his usual force.  Free Church\nfeeling was running very hieh at the time, and Dr. Chalmers was at great\npains to show that his undertaking was dictated solely by a regard to\nthe good of the people.  'Who cares,' he asked, 'about the Free Church,\ncompared with the Christian good of Scotland?  Who cares about any\nchurch but as an instrument of Christian good?  For be assured that the\nmoral and religious well-being of the population is of infinitely higher\nimportance than the advancement of any sect.'\n\nThe district selected was of the worst description--a fourth part of the\nwhole population being paupers, and another fourth street beggars,\nthieves, and prostitutes.  The population amounted to upwards of 400\nfamilies, of whom 300 had no connection with any church.  Of 411\nchildren of school age, 290 were growing up without any education.  The\nplan of Dr. Chalmers was to divide the whole territory into twenty\ndistricts, containing each about twenty families.  To each district a\nvisitor was appointed, whose duty was to visit each family once a week,\nunder directions printed by Dr. Chalmers to show the specific object of\nthe visitation.  A school was provided, and the visitors were\ninstructed, in the first instance, to show an active interest in the\nyoung, and exhort the parents to send their children to the school.  A\nsmall fee was exacted, on the principle that what was paid for would be\nmore valued, and that a more regular attendance would be secured.[5] The\nvisitors were instructed to meet with Dr. Chalmers every Saturday\nevening, the first meeting taking place on 27th July 1844.  On the 6th\nNovember, Dr. Chalmers held his first meeting with the people, telling\nthem all he would do for them, and all that they were expected to do for\nthemselves.  On 11th November, when the school was opened, there were 64\nscholars; in the course of the year there were 250.  On the 22nd\nDecember, public worship was commenced by Dr. Chalmers in a tan-loft.\nThe attendance was not encouraging after all the visiting that had been\ngoing on--only about a dozen adults, and these mostly old women.  In\nApril 1845, the services of the Rev. W. Tasker were secured as\nmissionary-minister, and before the end of the year the nucleus of a\nfair congregation had been formed.  A library, a savings-bank, a\nwashing-house, and a female industrial school were added to the\nparochial equipments.  Dr. Chalmers preached and worshipped often in the\nloft, met with the visitors, and addressed the people as new features\nwere added to the scheme.  'When he was a hearer merely,' says Mr.\nDodds, 'one would see him near the pulpit, in a crowd of deaf old women,\nwho were meanly clothed, but were following the services with unflagging\nattention and interest. His eye was upon every one of them, to\nanticipate their wishes and difficulties.  He would help one old woman\nto find out the text; he would take hold of the psalm-book of another,\nhand to hand, and join her in the song of praise. Any one looking at him\ncould see that he was in a state of supreme enjoyment.'  And most\nearnestly did he pray for a blessing on the work, and that it might be\nthe forerunner of many such undertakings.\n\n  [5] He used to speak with great delight of a poor woman, who told him\n      that by going out at seven in the morning she earned enough, by\n      raking among the ashes, to pay for the schooling of her eldest\n      daughter, but wished the second also to attend.  His first impulse\n      was to offer to pay for her, but that, he feared, would hurt her\n      independence; so he said: 'What would you say to rise at six in\n      the morning and earn enough to pay for her too?' On the following\n      Saturday she came to tell him she had done it.  'I could have\n      stood before her,' he said, 'with cap in hand, for in truth she\n      was above myself.'\n\n\n'We would give Thee no rest, O God, until Thou hast opened the window of\nheaven and caused righteousness to flow down that street like a mighty\nriver.'  'Let such a memorial of Christian philanthropy be set up in\nthat place as to be a praise and an example both in the city of our\nhabitation and in other cities of the land.'  'Reveal to me, O God, the\nright tactics, the right way and method of proceeding in the management\nof the affairs of the West Port.  Oh that I were enabled to pull down\nthe strongholds of sin and of Satan which are there!'  'O my God, give\nme the power of ordering matters aright in the West Port....  And more\nespecially, O God, let me understand Thy will in regard to the right\nplace and performances of a female agency.'  'Draw close the affections\nand affinity between Mr. Tasker and the families of the West Port....\nDo Thou guide and encourage him, O Lord....  Oh may he not only be\nhimself saved, but may he be the instrument of salvation to many; and\nmay both he and I be carried in safety, and at length with triumph, to\nthat prosperous termination for which we are jointly labouring!'\n\n\nWe have no space to dwell further on the history of the West Port.  The\nsweep of the experiment was complete. On 19th February 1847 a new church\nwas opened; and on the 25th April, one month before his death, Dr.\nChalmers administered the Lord's Supper to the congregation.  On that\noccasion he said to Mr. Tasker, 'I have got now the desire of my heart;\nGod has indeed answered my prayer, and I could now lay down my head in\npeace and die.' And he wrote to Mr. Lennox, 'I wish to communicate what\nto me is the most joyful event of my life.  I have been intent for\nthirty years on the completion of a territorial experiment, and I have\nnow to bless God for the consummation of it.'\n\nIt may be well to add that under Mr. Tasker and his successors the cause\nhas prospered greatly.  After being enlarged twice, the original church\nstill proved too small, and a new and spacious building was erected a\nlittle way off.  The congregation now numbers upwards of 1300\ncommunicants. Of course it is not wholly territorial; people that have\nbecome attached to a church cannot be driven out of it when they leave\nthe neighbourhood; but the old building is still retained as a mission\nchurch, and the territorial work continues.  In the Free Church in\nEdinburgh the experiment was repeated many times, new territorial\nchurches in poor and needy districts having been erected at Holyrood,\nPleasance, Back of Canongate (Moray), Cowgate, Cowgate Head, and\nFountainbridge.  In Glasgow there have been many more, and several in\nthe other large towns of Scotland.  The Established Church has striven\nwith great success to have its extension churches endowed, thereby\ncarrying into effect the original idea of Chalmers.  And yet, in spite\nof all this, the aim of Chalmers is as far from being realised as ever.\nWith the increasing population, the number of persons, in our large\ntowns especially, who have no connection with any church is larger than\nin Chalmers's time.  And, alas!  the wave of scepticism and of\nsecularism that is passing over us intensifies the evil and magnifies\nthe difficulty.\n\nIn connection with his public labours, it only remains for us to advert\nto his work as professor of theology during the last few years of his\nlife.  It had long been his desire to reduce his lectures to a form that\nwould convey the fruits of his maturest reflections, both on the\ncredentials and contents of the Christian revelation.  When he began his\n_Horae Biblicae Quotidianae_ and _Sabbaticae_, he began at the same time\nto condense and reconstruct his lectures; the two works advanced _pari\npassu_; the devout study of the Scriptures went hand in hand with the\nendeavour, in the spirit of the Baconian philosophy, to present the\nsubstance of their contents.  Hence arose his _Institutes of\nTheology_--a work which has received far too little attention since\nGerman theology began to supersede our own, but which may one day, in\nsome future age, be valued as it should.\n\nBut the great merit of Chalmers as a professor lay in the enthusiasm\nwith which he inspired his students.  It would have been hard indeed for\nany conscientious youth to be under him and not feel his soul quickened,\nat least occasionally, to a sublime ardour, and fired with a new\nambition. So wonderful was his influence, that at the Disruption\nnine-tenths of those who passed through his classes stood by his side.\nThe present writer, though he spent but one session under him before the\nDisruption, can bear testimony, not only to the intellectual and\nspiritual impulse he gave, but to the subtle sympathy which drew his\nstudents to share his church views, though he never alluded to them in\nthe class, and to the enthusiasm with which they listened to him in the\nGeneral Assembly.  He well knew that in the Free Church the mass of the\nministers would be but poorly paid, and that there was all the greater\nreason why they should be well equipped by superior scholarship, and\nespecially by superior piety, for their office.  And in this he was\nhighly successful.  After three sessions in the Free Church College, he\ncould testify that the students of his last session stood the highest of\nany he had known, not only in general proficiency and scholarship, but\nalso in their sense of divine things, and devotedness in heart and\nspirit to the great objects of the Christian ministry.  In his later\nyears, it was his practice to invite his students to private interviews\nfor spiritual conversation and prayer.\n\nOn 4th June 1846, he laid the foundation-stone of the Free Church\nCollege.  It had been considered a great stroke of policy that the most\ncommanding site in the city had been secured for the building.  The\nwriter of this sketch, who was present on the occasion, remembers his\ngrand appearance after the ceremony, when his noble head appeared above\na confused pile of stones and timbers; and, producing a scrap of paper\ncovered with shorthand hieroglyphics, he apologised, with a broad smile,\nfor taking to 'the paper,' seeing it was but a scrap, whereas if he were\nto speak extempore, his remarks might become an 'interminable\nrigmarole.'  Not a little of the short speech was addressed to the\nworkmen engaged in the building.  That dear object of his life, to raise\nthe working population to a higher level of life in the best sense of\nthe word, came back on him in all its strength.  Within the walls to be\nerected, there would be, he said, no false theories of equality taught\nor countenanced; but there was one equality between man and man that\nwould be strenuously enforced,--the essential equality of human souls;\nit would be taught that, in the high count and reckoning of eternity,\nthe soul of the poorest of nature's children, the raggedest boy that ran\nalong the pavement, was of like estimation in the eye of Heaven with the\ngreatest and noblest of the land.  The young men in that college would\never be taught that, though their education might fit them for the\ncompany of princes and peers, it would be their peculiar glory to be\nvisitants of the poor man's humble cottage, and to pray by the poor\nman's dying bed.  'Heaven grant that the platform of humble life may be\nraised immeasurably higher than at present, and through the whole extent\nof it--that the mighty host who swarm upon its surface, brought under\nthe elevating power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and so rescued from\ngrovelling ignorance and loathsome dissipation, may rise to a full\nequality with ourselves in all that is characteristic of humanity, and\ntake their place, along with us, side by side, on the footing of kindred\nand companionable men.'  He then made a graceful allusion to the young\nqueen, who had mercifully escaped one of those horrible attempts on her\nlife that occurred in the earlier part of her reign; prayed that she\nmight long continue to adorn her exalted position, and concluded by\ncalling for three cheers on her behalf.  Thus the college of the Free\nChurch was founded on a cordial recognition of both ends of the social\nscale: with benevolent wishes for the working multitude on the one hand,\nand a cordial and loyal tribute to the Sovereign on the other.\n\nThe last of the public services rendered by Dr. Chalmers to the Free\nChurch consisted of a paper on the education question, and of his\nevidence before the Committee of the House of Commons on the refusal of\nsites.  It was about the time when the question of national education\nwas coming full into the arena of discussion; and, at the request of Mr.\nFox Maule, afterwards Earl of Dalhousie, Chalmers, who had given much\nattention to the subject, recorded his views in a short paper.  The\ndifficulty was about the introduction of religion.  Dr. Chalmers's view\nwas substantially that which was subsequently acted upon: he advised\nthat there should be no legislative enactment on the subject of\nreligion, but that the regulation of this should be left to the\ngoverning bodies of the several schools.  Not that religion was\nunimportant, but the very reverse; but because the Christian church was\nso divided that it could be far better seen to by the local managers.\nTo this he added a conscience clause; the result being substantially the\nsystem which prevails in Scotland at the present day.  He took occasion\nto add, 'We despair of any good being done in the way of Christianising\nour population but through the medium of a government themselves\nChristian, and endowing the true religion, which I hold to be their\nimperative duty, not because it is the religion of the many, but because\nit is true.'\n\nIt was in the last month of his life that he set out for London, to meet\nthe Site Committee.  On the 9th May 1847 he preached in Marylebone\nPresbyterian Church, 'with more comfort than I ever did in London.'\nAfter replying to the questions put by the committee through Mr. Maule,\nhe encountered an onslaught from Sir James Graham, who came armed with a\nbundle of papers containing speeches, etc., of Chalmers, by means of\nwhich he thought to entangle him.  After his long examination before Sir\nJames appeared, Chalmers was somewhat exhausted, but he roused himself,\nand met him in the spirit of a practised warrior.  The only point of\nimportance raised by Sir James arose out of the London lectures, in\nwhich he had spoken very favourably of the Church of England.  'I told\nhim that I did not advocate the Church of England; that I felt more\nhopeful of it then than now, when like to be overrun by Puseyism; that\neven then I denounced its figment of an Apostolical succession, and,\nwithout directly attacking its Erastianism, spoke of our own\nindependence, and in terms which provoked the jealousy of English\nchurchmen,' etc.  etc.  But a great part of the examination concerned\nthe voting of women at the election of office-bearers and the like; a\npaltry question, as Dr. Chalmers called it, having no sort of reasonable\nconnection with the refusal of sites.  'We concluded,' Dr. Chalmers\nwrote to his wife, 'in a state of great exhaustion, yet with an erect\ndemeanour and visage unabashed.'\n\nWe conclude with a glimpse of his more private life in the few years\npreceding his death.  Unwearied as he ever was in his endeavour to\ncultivate the affections of his children, and impress them with the most\nserious responsibilities of life, his interest in them seems only to\nhave deepened as they grew up.  He began a series of monthly letters to\nbe addressed to each in succession, and carried it on for a considerable\ntime.  Two of his six daughters were married, but they were not excluded\nfrom the privilege of his fatherly correspondence.  And by and by, a\ngrandson, Thomas Chalmers Hanna, was old enough to receive letters\nfitted to interest him, and draw his affections to so loving a\ngrandfather. It is strange, indeed, that any biographer of Chalmers\nshould have represented him (as Mrs. Oliphant has done) as not showing\nsocial affection.  'My ever dear Anne,' 'My dearest Eliza,' 'My dearest\nGrace,' were his ordinary salutations, and the spirit of the letters\ncorresponded to the address.  Very touching is his letter to his eldest\ndaughter on the death of a beloved infant.  As for his grandson, he just\nrevels in affection.  'Tell Tommy how much I love him, and pray for his\nbeing good.'  On occasion of his last visit to London, he visited the\nwidow of his brother James, and prayed with her; a likeness of his\nbrother was shown him, and impressed him so much that it haunted him for\ndays.  This was the brother that had held himself so much aloof both\nfrom him and all the family.\n\nIn his last visit to his native Anstruther and its neighbourhood, in\n1845, his unchanged and unchangeable affection for the scenes and\nfriends of his youth showed a marvellous freshness and tenacity.  Many\nare the stories of his pleasure in recalling memorials of the past.  He\nhunted up an old schoolfellow, a tailor, and told him that he had been\nthe first to acquaint him with the form of the earth.  He congratulated\nanother schoolfellow, who, like himself, had suffered from smallpox,\nthat while other people's faces were 'aye getting the waur, theirs were\nalways getting the better o' the wear!'  He sought out the place where\nLizzie Green's water-bucket used to stand, where he and his heated\nplayfellows had often been allowed very kindly to slake their thirst.\nBut most pathetic was his visit to the house of Barnsmuir.  When he was\nsome twelve or fourteen years old, the eldest daughter of that house had\nbeen in the habit of riding into Anstruther on a little pony, and\nChalmers had conceived a deep and tender attachment to her, like that of\nLord Byron for his Mary Duff.  The young lady was married while he was\nat college, and she had died many years before this visit.  At his\nspecial request her youngest sister met him at Barnsmuir.  In the house,\nthe remembrance of that early love came upon him with singular power; he\nasked respectfully about her life and death, and learned with deep\nemotion that she had died in the full Christian hope, and that some of\nhis letters to her sister had soothed and comforted her.  He then asked\nif there were any portrait of her, and being shown a profile, gazed on\nit with great earnestness, fixed his own card on the back of it, and,\ngazing on it again, gave expression to his strong affection, and burst\ninto a flood of tears.  It was a touching proof, as his biographer has\nsaid, that he was as much distinguished for the tenderness and tenacity\nof his attachments as for the brilliance of his gifts.\n\nDr. Chalmers was ever very simple, and yet in some respects singular, in\nhis habits of life.  Abstemious he was to a degree; ever watchful lest\nhe should at any time be in a condition of body that would interfere\nwith the activity of his intellectual and spiritual nature; at times, at\nleast, practising total abstinence, and always great moderation in both\nfood and drink.  It was his usual practice to spend the early part of\nthe day in composition and study; he so carefully excogitated his\nsubjects that he was ever ready to use his pen, never obliged to loiter\nin order to form his plan or shape his thought, but able to write\nrapidly as soon as the pen was in his hand, and seldom or never\ncorrecting.  His handwriting was anything but elegant, yet very\ncharacteristic; the upright letters, the firmness of each stroke, and\nthe continuity of the whole indicating decision, force, and flow. So\nexact was his view, that he could calculate for weeks and months\nbeforehand the rate of his progress and the day when each piece of\nwriting would be finished.  His remarkable calculating or counting\nfaculty was brought into operation in what we should call fantastic\nways.  In stropping his razor, he would begin with two strokes, next day\nthree, and so on till he reached a maximum number; then he would reverse\nthe process and gradually diminish till he came back to two.  In walking\nhe put his staff to the ground regularly at each fourth step; counting,\nif he chose, the number of his steps, and able to keep count even if he\nshould meet a friend and walk with him in animated conversation.  When\nhe lived in Inverleith Row he delighted to find new routes to the\nuniversity, and ascertain and record their several lengths.  One day, as\nhe told a favourite student, he had been trying to find a near road\nbetween Comely Bank and Inverleith Row, but got entangled, as he put it\nin his original way, 'in the accessories of a farmhouse, where I was set\nupon by a mastiff, and so obliged to turn back.'  We have noted his\ndelight in ascending cathedral towers, and his invariable habit of\ncounting the steps.  At any famous stream he would lap the water, thus\nmaking the connection more intimate between the stream and himself.  His\nlove of order was remarkable, though one might not have supposed it from\nhis general manner. It was through the power of orderliness that he was\nable to achieve all he did within the compass of his life.  By varying\nhis employments,--now writing, now visiting or attending meetings, now\ntravelling, now preaching or lecturing, now entertaining friends, now\nreading and pondering, he kept himself comparatively fresh, and seemed\nat all times ready for new work.  '_Nulla dies sine linea_' might have\nbeen his motto, had it not been that every day had half a dozen linea in\nplace of one.\n\nHis reading, after he became a professor, was considerable, partly in\ntheological books, partly in books of practical religion, and to a small\nextent in general literature.  So little direct sign of anything\nShakespearean is there in his writings that it rather surprises us to\nfind him recording towards the end of his life that he had completed an\nentire perusal of the great dramatist, as well as of Milton and Gibbon.\nHe considered Shakespeare 'an intellectual miracle, the greatest man\nthat ever lived.'  His favourite piece was _Midsummer Night's Dream_,\nshowing, as Dr. Peter Bayne has remarked, 'that after all the struggles\nand worries of his life, he still walked in the aerial gaiety, the\nmany-tinted, summerlike beauty, the genial though keen sagacity of that\npoem.  It is a very remarkable circumstance, telling of a gentleness of\nnature, a kind, gleesome humour, an exuberant, unstrained force and\nfreshness of intellect, rarely seen among theologians.'\n\nIn the prosecution of his incessant labours, he was no doubt\nconsiderably helped by his sense of humour.  He knew well the relaxation\nand the refreshment derived from a good laugh.  Many a humorous story he\nused to tell. One of his favourite stories referred to a boor who was\ngetting married, but was such a dolt that he could not give an answer to\nthe questions of the minister.  One of the man's neighbours who was\npresent, chagrined at such want of manners, and desiring to give the\nfellow a needed lesson in etiquette, gave him a slap on the back, and\nsaid, 'Ye brute, can you no' boo to the minister?'  And it mattered not\nif the story told against himself.  When the astronomical discourses\nwere delivered, Dr. Chalmers came on an honest woman who had been\nhearing one of them, and was curious to know what she could make of it.\n'Weel, sir,' said the woman, 'I canna say that I understood ye\na'thegether, but, O sir, there was something unco suitable and\nsatisfyin' in your psalms!'\n\nDuring his visit to London in connection with the Site Committee in May\n1847, he had greatly enjoyed his intercourse with many friends--among\nthem Isaac Taylor, James Hamilton, Baptist Noel, Mr. Morell, and Thomas\nCarlyle. He described Carlyle as 'a strong-featured man, and of strong\nsense.  We were most cordial and coalescing, and he very complimentary\nand pleasant; but his talk was not at all Carlylish; much rather the\nplain and ordinary conversation of good, ordinary common-sense, with a\ndeal of hearty laughing on both sides.'  Chalmers greatly lamented the\nalienation which he saw between the churches and the body of literary\nand scientific men.  He enlarged on 'localism' and the West Port;\nnothing was too hard for 'localism.'  Carlyle remarked afterwards to a\nfriend, 'What a wonderful old man Chalmers is!  or, rather, he has all\nthe buoyancy of youth.  When so many of us are wringing our hands in\nhopeless despair over the vileness and wretchedness of the large towns,\nthere goes the old man, shovel in hand, down into the dirtiest puddles\nof the West Port of Edinburgh, cleans them out, and fills the sewers\nwith living waters.  It is a beautiful sight.'\n\nAfter a flying visit to Brighton, where he preached for one of his\nformer students, he proceeded to Gloucestershire, and spent a happy time\nwith his ever dear sister Jane.  On Sunday he preached his last sermon\nin the Independent chapel of the Rev. Mr. Dove, from the text Isaiah\nxxvii. 4, 5.  A brief visit was paid at Darlington at the house of Mr.\nand Mrs. Backhouse, 'a most delicious abode.' He was profoundly\ninterested in Mrs. Backhouse's account of the heavenly state of mind of\nher father for some time before his death; while Mrs. Backhouse was\nherself deeply struck with the very same spirit in him.  During this\nvisit the whole of his journal letters had been addressed to his wife;\non Thursday (the 27th) he wrote to her, 'This is my last sheet.\nTo-morrow evening I expect to see you by the favour of Him whose right\nhand preserves us continually, and for whose grace on us all I ever\npray.--I ever am, my dearest Grace, yours most affectionately, Thomas\nChalmers.'\n\nHe arrived at his house in Morningside on the Friday evening (2 8th\nMay), apparently in his usual health and strength.  On the following\nmorning, at breakfast, his conversation was as lively and vigorous as\never.  The forenoon of the Saturday was occupied in preparing the\nCollege Report, which he was to give in on Monday to the General\nAssembly.  On the Sabbath morning he conversed freely with the Rev. Mr.\nGemmel, who was staying at his house; afterwards with Dr. Cunningham;\nthen attended afternoon service in Morningside Free Church, and on his\nway home called on Mrs. Coutts, an old Fifeshire friend, of high\nChristian character.  Part of the evening was spent in writing to his\nsister, Mrs. Morton, and in conversation with Mr. Gemmel.  His family\nnever saw him more genial and happy.  After worship, he bade his family\nremember that they must be early to-morrow; then he waved his hand and\nsaid, 'A general good-night.'\n\nOn the following morning he was found dead in bed.  It seemed likely,\nfrom the state of the body, that his spirit had departed soon after he\nlay down.  There was not the slightest trace of struggle, either on the\nface or in the attitude of the body.  Never did death give a lighter\ntouch.\n\nIn a funeral sermon preached by the Rev. Dr. Lindsay Alexander, the mode\nof his departure was beautifully idealised.  He recalled a passage in\none of Dr. Chalmers's sermons, in which he fancies a man 'standing on\nthe margin of this green world,' and feeling himself very closely bound\nto 'the region of sense, and of life, and of society'; but suddenly\narrested by seeing some happy island of the blest floating past, 'in the\nlight of its surpassing glories, and its sounds of sweeter melody, and a\npurer beauty resting on every field': discerning also in its inhabitants\n'a peace, and a piety, and a benevolence that put a moral gladness into\nevery bosom, and united the whole society in rejoicing sympathy with\neach other, and with the beneficent Father of them all'; observing,\nmoreover, signals of welcome for himself, and an open pathway of\ncommunication to the island; insomuch that he is captivated by the\nsight; earth becomes a wilderness, and 'the land of invitation' attracts\nhim with irresistible power.\n\n\n'With this grand passage in my mind,' said Dr. Lindsay Alexander,' I\ncould not but fancy him who uttered it, as realising at the moment of\nhis departure some of the features of the case here supposed.  I\npictured to myself how, when the premonitory touch of the Destroyer\nbroke his slumbers, he might imagine for a moment that he had been\nsummoned to his appointed work, and how, casting his eye upon the\nmaterials he had prepared, he might begin to turn, with no reluctant\nemotion, his thoughts upon the duties with which he was charged; but in\nan instant another scene burst upon his view; a brighter radiance than\nthat of the morning sun fell upon his brow; sweeter voices than those of\nwife or child broke upon his ear; a grander career of service than any\nearth could furnish stretched before him; the hand of One more glorious\nfar than any child of man hung out to him the signals of welcome; and,\nas he gazed, he acknowledged the superior claims of that brighter world,\nand laid himself meekly down, and so his spirit passed rejoicingly away,\nleaving his earthly tabernacle with a smile upon the lips, and not one\nshade of suffering on the brow.'\n\n\nOn that Monday morning, the General Assembly met to receive his College\nReport.  When the sad news came, the shock was so overwhelming that it\nwould have been impossible to look at business, even if respect for his\nmemory had not demanded an adjournment.  As men recovered somewhat from\nthe first shock, the sense of bereavement, of impoverishment, of\nwidowhood, grew the greater.  There were many men of extraordinary gifts\nin that Assembly, but who was there to be named with him?\n\nAn unprecedented concourse of mourners, much greater than had ever been\nseen at an Edinburgh funeral, followed his body to the grave.  And from\nevery pulpit, and from other quarters innumerable, the most respectful\nand cordial tributes were paid to his memory.  It was felt that since\nthe days of Knox no such man had been known in the Scottish church.  His\ngreatness was shown alike by what he was and what he had done.  He\nseemed to combine the orator and the statesman, the ecclesiastic and the\npatriot, the philosopher and the poet, the scientist and the saint. No\nman had ever been so run after as a pulpit orator.  No man of his day\nhad ever conceived so great undertakings or done so much to realise\nthem.  His two hundred churches astonished every one; his Sustentation\nFund astonished still more.  With theology in the forefront, his horizon\nincluded philosophy, physical science, social science, political\neconomy, and literature; and for each and all of these he found a place\nand a use in the Kingdom of God.  And with all his greatness he was\nsimple as a child.  Like his Master, 'he made himself of no\nreputation'--never sought great things for himself.  The world, and even\nthe church, hardly knew how near he lived to God--how much he had of the\nsaint.  He was known to be very affable and affectionate, but the depth\nand tenderness of his affection, especially for his own family, were\nhardly suspected.  When it was announced that, with all his gifts and\ngraces, he had passed from among his brethren, it seemed as if the\nbrightest star in the firmament had ceased to shine.\n\nIt is an interesting question--if Chalmers had been alive at the present\nday, what would he have thought of the position of the different\nbranches of the Scottish church, and what counsel would he have given to\nthem on the subject of union?\n\nTo answer these questions we must bear two things in mind: first, that\nhe held the recent treatment of the church by the civil courts, and\nvirtually by the state itself, to be destructive of her liberty and her\nlife, insomuch that it had become an absolute necessity to abandon\nconnection with the state; but, second, that he held the state bound to\ncontribute to the support of the church, and the Free Church bound to\nreturn to her old connection, provided the liberty should be restored\nand practically secured of which she had been unrighteously deprived.\n\nWould he, then, have held that liberty to be now restored, and the way\nto an honourable, safe, and beneficial alliance reopened?  We doubt it.\nHe would certainly have seen that, in point of fact, the Established\nChurch now enjoys a degree of liberty that enables her to discharge the\nordinary functions of a Christian church without obstruction, and in\nparticular to continue with great success that very enterprise of church\nextension for which he thought that she would be able to do nothing.\nBut he could not have failed to see that this liberty was an indirect\nfruit of the Disruption, and that it was quietly conceded to the\nEstablished Church in order that she might stand practically on the same\nplatform of liberty with the nonconformist churches, and especially her\ngreat rival the Free Church.  He would have found no concession of\nprinciple, no acknowledgment by the state or by the civil courts of an\nessential difference between a Christian church and a civil corporation,\nand no acknowledgment that the church, as the creation of Christ,\nenjoyed privileges from Him independent of any state.  He would have\nfound no repudiation of the dictum of the then Lord President that the\nEstablished Church had no jurisdiction whatever in the country except\nwhat had been conferred by the state; and he would have found no\nsecurity that if a new collision should occur between church and state,\nbetween the worldly and the spiritual power, the state would repudiate\nher old principles and policy.\n\nFurther, the contention of Chalmers in his London lectures and in his\nlatest deliverance (see p. 148) always was, that the state ought to\nsupport religion, not merely because people wished it, but because the\nreligion was true.  Would he, then, have found in the members of the\npresent Parliament any such value for revealed truth, as such, as would\nhave given him confidence in them as its guardians?  A Parliament that\nnumbered Agnostics, Jews, Roman Catholics, Unitarians, and what not\namong its members--how could such a body be a nursing-father or a\nnursing-mother to the Christian church?  Such a Parliament could not\nsafely be intrusted with its guardianship. It was a very different\ncondition of things when the Scottish church allied itself to the\nScottish Parliament, all or nearly all being members of the church.  Nor\ncould he have found any cause for believing that at any future time,\nwithin reasonable distance, the nursing of the church could be safely\ncommitted to parliamentary hands.\n\nBut what then?  There were three great Presbyterian churches in\nScotland, with much of their resources wasted through division, but\ncapable, by reasonable arrangements, of so combining their forces that\nhis grand object--the bringing of all Scotland under the influence of\nChristian teaching--might at the least be greatly advanced.  We can\nhardly conceive of any other advice that Chalmers would have given than\nthat the vinculum of state-connection should be severed, and all the\nthree churches should unite, and rouse themselves for one great,\nsustained, imperial effort to turn the country into the garden of the\nLord. But what of the endowments?  It is just as difficult for us to\nconceive that he would have been in favour of alienating them to secular\npurposes.  No, he would have said, that is not necessary, and should not\nbe; keep them for their original purpose, and place them under some\npublic management, so that every congregation of the united body may\nhave a share of them, if it please.  This was certainly his feeling in a\nsomewhat parallel case.  In 1833, when the Irish Church Reform Bill was\nunder discussion, Chalmers wrote to his sister, Mrs. Morton, 'I am\nrelieved by the bill, the only flaw in it (although that may be one of\ndeadly mischief) being the secularisation of the sum which they expect\nfrom the sale of church lands.'[6]  We can readily conceive how the\ngreat soul of Chalmers would have expanded once more, and his face\nbeamed as the hope arose anew, that even yet his beloved country might\nrealise his magnificent ideal, and, by God's blessing on the labours of\na united church, its waste and desolate places might yet blossom as the\nrose.\n\n  [6] _Correspondence of Dr. Chalmers_, p. 216.\n\nNo doubt, Chalmers died a disappointed man, so far as his great scheme\nfor the good of his country was concerned. He failed, and yet he did not\nfail.\n\n      'If he strained too wide,\n    It was not to take honour, but give help;\n    The gesture was heroic.  If his hand\n    Accomplished nothing--(well, it is not proved)\n    That empty hand thrown impotently out\n    Were sooner caught, I think, by One in heaven\n    Than many a hand that reaped a harvest in,\n    And keeps the scythe glow on it.'\n\n\nWe love the man for his noble aims and heroic efforts; and our love and\nadmiration are only touched with a tenderer feeling, in that, when he\nfailed, he did not abate one jot of heart or hope for his church and\ncountry, but left behind him his West Port experiment as a monument of\nwhat was possible, and an encouragement to all future generations to\ncontinue to cherish what had proved for him--a hope unfulfilled.","title":"Thomas Chalmers","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":49866}