3. The work of reform, we are much pleased to find, Mr. W. regards as naturally appropriate to every man, woman and child, who may engage in "the business of doing good." To the doctrine which he here teaches, we most heartily subscribe. It is, in our view, clearly the doctrine of the bible. It is delightful to hear Mr. W. say, "Indeed in a state of imperfection like ours, the business of doing good, seems of necessity, to take, for the most part, the shape of reform." What a wide field of exertion is here thrown open before us! What various and exhausting labors are we here required to perform! How extended the harvest, here to be gathered. Here is a work, which for "the most part," comprehends, ay, "of necessity" comprehends the "business of doing good." Who, then, may engage in a work so heavenly and honorable?-so benign in its tendencies, so happy in its influence, so useful in its results, that Mr. W. is disposed to assign to it, the "highest place among all the departments of human beneficence." Who? Why EVERY MAN, who would expend his resources, and employ his powers, "in the business of doing good." From this business, he must "of necessity," for "the most part," be excluded, if he refuses to be a reformer. And how can he refuse? What, refuse to aid in removing those evils, which have fallen upon afflicted humanity with a crushing force, "immeasurably greater" than those that have befallen it "from any other source"! And this, when "the call to this work is immeasurably louder" than any other which falls upon his ear, and demands his activity! He must then, whoever he may be--be a stupid, or sordid, or cowardly wretch, who is dead to the wants and woes of human nature, though weltering in its own blood!

4. The application of his doctrine "to the enemies of seasonable and needful changes," Mr. W. ventures boldly to make. Upon these "obstinate conservatives of every abuse," he seasonably and earnestly urges the startling thought, that to them "the horrors of revolution are to be charged, more than to the infatuated multitude, who are its immediate agents and victims." This we regard as a fair application of a sound and weighty doctrine. Let every man who refuses to engage in the work of reform-a work "which" Mr. W. well reminds us, "needs to be as incessant as the insidious encroachments of corruption,"--take it home to his inmost soul, before it falls in thunder-claps upon his ears. We

pray God to save us from a condemnation so just and dreadful, as Mr. W. warns us to beware of! In behalf of all his readers, we thank him for his well-timed and pointed admonition.

We are now to contemplate Mr. W. in a new position. How he arrived there, we are quite at a loss to determine. The maxims, doctrines, and movements, which in the one position and the other, he proposes and commends, seem to us to be subversive of each other. Among the arts of sophistry few are better adapted to mislead and embarass than the art of making distinctions on the one hand, where' none in reality exist; and on the other, of confounding things, which naturaly stand separate from each other. In this art, we are sorry to say, Mr. W. deserves the reputation of a distinguished adept. He finds it convenient to make a marked distinction between the "immediate offices of religion" and the "function of the true reformer." Both he invests with such an air of awfulness, as might be supposed to hang over the ruins of the Holy of Holies. In the spirit of the solemn bird of night screaming among such ruins, Mr. W. warns "the unbidden" to beware of the "profaneness" of "meddling with the fundamental institutions of civil government and religion." To what, we humbly ask, does this distinction with the terrific conclusion, appended to it, amount? In the light, which Mr. W. himself has shed upon it, we hesitate not to pronounce it infinitely less than an airy abstraction. In "meddling" with the institutions of religion, according to Mr. W., the authorized reformer discharges a "function" almost as "high and sacred" as "the immediate offices of religion"! In the work of reform Luther and Calvin and Knox occupied ground almost as high and sacred, as that, to which the "immediate offices of religion" naturally conducted them! And so, the "function" of a religious reformer is no religious "office"! And yet that "function," though less high and sacred than a religious office, "unbidden hands" must beware of assuming, lest they involve themselves almost in the guilt of sacrilege! If any reader supposes, that we wrong Mr. W. in ascribing to him such nonsense, let him read and "inwardly digest" such statements as the following: "If it is true as we believe, that after the immediate offices of religion, there is no function on earth higher or more sacred than that of

the true reformer, it follows, that after sacrilege, there is nothing more profane, than with rash and unbidden hands to meddle with the fundamental institutions of civil government and religion." Now along by the side of this, let us lay the following statements of Mr. W. in the same paper, and contemplate their mutual bearing on each other. "To a wise political or ecclesiastical reform, we are disposed to assign the highest place among all the departments of human beneficence. Indeed in a state of imperfection like OURS, THE BUSINESS OF DOING GOOD SEEMS OF NECESSITY to take, for the most part, THE SHAPE OF REFORM." Those who are bidden to do good must then, if they would obey God, be "for the most part," REFORMERS; and reformers too in matters" political and ecclesiastical." To place this matter in a clear light, a scene like the following may not be altogether inappropriate. An inquirer, intent on "doing good," with marked modesty and deep reverence approaches Mr. Woods.

Inquirer. Reverend Sir, I profess to be a christian. My Bible has strongly fastened the conviction upon my mind, that to the "business of doing good," I am unceasingly, heartily, and strenuously to devote all my powers and resources. Will you, as a public teacher, kindly suggest to me the modes, in which I am to expend my strength?

Mr. Woods. "In a state of imperfection like ours, the business of doing good seems of necessity to take, for the most part, the SHAPE of reform.”

Inquirer. I am charged then with the responsibilities of a reformer. These responsibilities are laid upon me by the strong hand of "necessity." There is no escape from their pressure. Let me then in the spirit of my profession welcome them. From this day onward to the close of my connection with "a state of imperfection like ours," be it mine, as a reformer, to maintain an incessant warfare with evil, under every form and name; and as my "aim and standard" to endeavor to raise human nature to "that blissful state, in which nothing shall hurt or molest."

Mr. Woods. Take care what you do! You ought to be "aware of the difference between an ideal and real republic, and that it is far easier to adjust the plastic and aerial elements of the former to fine spun theories, than the grosser and intractable materials of the latter." I charge you,

solemnly charge you to remember, that "after the immediate offices of religion there is no function on earth higher or more sacred than that of the true reformer." Take home then to your inmost soul the awful admonition, that "after sacrilege, there is nothing more profane, than with rash and unbidden hands to meddle with the fundamental institutions of civil government and religion.

Inquirer. Sir, you greatly shock and embarrass me. What am I to do? I pant to engage in the "business of doing good." Such desires moreover accord with—nay, spring from those convictions, which my Bible has wrought into the very texture of my spirit. You have taught me, that if I would do good, I must act the part of a reformer. As such, you bade me "aim" at nothing less than the introduction of that "blissful state, in which nothing shall hurt or molest." And now, about to give myself with a "hearty good will" to action, you direct my eye from so high an aim and deter me from so good a work, by trying to scare me with sepulchral groans about "unbidden hands," and "profaneness," and almost "sacrilege." If my exertions do not take the shape of reform-and reform too in matters "political and ecclesiastical," for these you yourself expressly specify-I must for ought I can see, for the "most part of necessity" do just nothing at all or give up myself to "the business of doing" evil. Would you ply me with temptation such as the honorable mayor* of a certain great city, "in the precincts of that august temple, where law and religion sit enthroned," urged upon a colored man of integrity and enterprize? His honor would not permit him to engage

* The following is an exact report of a conversation which took place in one of our cities between the magistrate who grants licenses and a colored man who applied for a license to drive a cart.

C. Will your honor grant me a license to drive a cart.

M. Are there any colored men who drive carts?

C. I do not know, sir.

M. It is not customary for colored men to drive carts.

C. Not if they can produce as good recommendations of character as white men?

M. Let me see your recommendation. It is a very good one, but

C. Is it good enough to obtain a license to sell rum, sir.

M. O yes: go to the alderman of the ward in which you live and he will attend to it, we grant colored men tavern licenses.

C. I don't want to sell rum, sir, I want to get an honest living. Is my unfortunate color the cause of your honor's refusing to grant me a license to get an honest living?

M. I cannot hold any argument on that subject; it will not change my mind. [See Anti-Slavery Record, vol. I, p. 68.]

in a useful employment, for which he was strongly recommended as well qualified; but his honor was quite ready to

license him to sell rum!

99.66

In opposition to Mr. Woods, we shall not hesitate to take the part of Mr. Woods in saying, that any such distinction as he makes between the offices of religion and the function of the reformer must be as mischievous as it is groundless. It is the act "of an enemy," to break up the christian community into castes, on the ground, that the appropriate work of some is too high and sacred to be approached by others. Is there in Heaven or on earth any employment more honorable or holy than the "business of doing good"? And is any man to be deterred from this by the notes of some officious night-bird dolefully screaming in his ears, "profaneness," sacrilege"? It is very true, that every man should seek to occupy a station, suited to his talents and acquirements. But he is bound, whoever he may be and wherever and however he may exert himself, to bring his entire being, in every design and in every movement into full and direct subserviency to the great object, for which Jehovah lives and reigns. Whatever may be his sphere of action, he thus becomes in the noblest sense of the phrase, a priest of the most high God. It is profane-it is sacrilegious for any of his fellow-laborers, to thrust him away from the altar on the ground, that he is a "common and unclean thing," and brings his offering with "unbidden hands." Magisterial pride and sacerdotal insolence may rudely interfere with him, in "the business of doing good." "Lording it over the heritage of God," they may try to break up his plans and counteract his exertions, on the pretence, that reform is a work too high and sacred for him. But this they cannot do, while he remembers the dignity, and privileges, and responsibilities of his high calling: "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculior people, that ye should shew forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light."

"The fundamental institutions of civil government and of religion" are not "to be meddled with with unbidden hands." Who are they, that bring this warning to our ears? Are they an order of superior beings, shining with angel wings? No. They are our own brethren and fellows. How came they to hold the offices, political or