purpose of expressing opinions in print may not discuss the propriety and expediency of publishing opinions is too absurd for serious refutation.

But Mr. Lord's argument goes further. It takes the ground that as, by the sixth Article, a discretion is allowed to the Executive Committee, that discretion cannot be controlled, and the Committee, in the discharge of their functions, are compared to judges, whom the people elect, but cannot direct in their judgment.

The fallacy of this part of the argument is in assuming that every agent, who is authorized to use his discretion to any extent, is necessarily beyond the control of his principal, and that every person who exercises his judgment is therefore a judge. This is too trifling an argument to require a reply. But there is a part of the charter, made such by reference, bearing on this point. In title third, in chapter eighteen of the first part of the Revised Statutes, it is provided that no corporation shall have powers, except such as are expressly granted, or necessary to carry out the enumerated powers. It is also provided that corporations may appoint subordinate agents, but no authority is given to appoint agents who shall be above the direction of the Society, and not subordinate to it. These officers, these Committees then are subordinate to the Society, or they are appointed in derogation of the charter, which is the law of the existence of the corporation.

This argument, however, is based on the idea that the sixth Article gives individual members of the Committee a veto upon the publication of tracts, on grounds of personal opinion. The proof is abundant. It has been proved beyond controversy, that this Article relates to denominational differences, and we shall not waste time in repeating arguments which remain unan. swered. Some new proofs were given, however, at the late Annual Meeting, that this is the practical construction put upon this Article by the Executive Committee themselves in other cases. It was publicly stated by a Life Director of the Society, on his own personal knowledge, that among the members of the Executive Committee, that day re-elected, there were some who use wine as a beverage, and some who open their parlors for

dancing; and on the platform, a Vice President of the Society publicly insulted the Society, by the offer of his tobacco box to the same Life Director! What do these facts teach, but that the Executive Committee themselves publish tracts whose principles they do not individually approve, whose precepts they do not personally regard, because they believe them to be approved by the majority of Christian donors to the Society, and can find no denominational objection to them. It is only on the subject of Slavery and the Slave Trade that their consciences are sensitive.

There is another course of inquiry which may throw light upon this subject, to wit, the uniform practice under this constitution. The resolutions adopted by the Society in 1857 were pronounced by Mr. Lord to be a usurpation, " a great usurpation" on the rights of the officers. If there are any precedents on this point, their number and directness will have influence in deciding the question.

We find by reference to the annual reports of the Society, that in 1827 the Society expressed its opinion on the importance of circulating religious tracts among the Western settlements of our country, and also among the higher as well as the lower classes of society. In 1828, the importance of the Valley of the Mississippi, of Spanish America, of Greece, and of heathen lands, as fields of labor, was discussed. In 1829, the Society resolved that "we feel encouragement to continue exertions in the Valley of the Mississippi." In 1830, a resolution was offered by Dr. Spring, "that it is our duty as a Society to extend our operations to the heathen, who sit in darkness, as well as to supply the destitute portions of our own country." In 1831, the Valley of the Mississippi was again recommended by the Society, as a promising field for effort, and the duty of the Society to extend its efforts to distant lands affirmed. In 1832, on motion of Mr. Eastman, it was resolved, "that the Society will proceed immediately to the work of supplying systematically the entire destitute population of our country with tracts." In 1833, able writers are called on, by vote of the Society, to furnish new and appropriate tracts to alarm the conscience. In 1834, the Society by vote responded to the call from the Southern States, and resolved

that they would endeavor with the least possible delay, besides the continued circulation of tracts, to place one or more of the Society's bound volumes in every family, willing to receive the same, in the States of Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and the Territory of Florida." The system of colportage has been repeatedly approved, its extension recommended, and its results rejoiced in. Seamen and boatmen, German infidels and rationalists, as well as Papists, have been specially pointed at, as classes requiring the labors of the Society, and the peculiar opinions entertained by these persons have been referred to, as needing to be met by the publications of the Society. We have not looked through all the Annual Reports; enough has here been shown to make it evident that the Society has from the first considered it its right and duty to discuss fields of labor, and to recommend particular sections of the country, particular classes of citizens, and particular views to the attention and labors of its agents and officers. It is believed that not a year has passed since the formation of the Society in which some expression of opinion has not been made by the Society itself, on the best mode of conducting the business of the Society; and as these plans were to be carried out by the Executive Committee, it is manifest that from the first there has been advice and instruction, or whatever you please to call it, given by the Society, to its officers at the Annual Meetings. Have the Society supposed, from year to year, that they were usurping any of the powers of the Executive Committee? And did Mr. Lord and the members of the Executive Committee, when they offered or seconded these resolutions, suppose that they, as members of the Society, were usurping rights which belonged to the officers? It is too plain to be argued. The fair construction of the charter and the uniform practice of the Society agree in support of the position that the agents of the Society are not superior to the Society itself.

One other objection remains. It is assumed by Mr. Lord that the persons to be benefited by this Society are "the ignorant, the unenlightened, the needy," and that this is to be done only by circulating tracts, and on this assumption he argues that if tracts cannot be circulated, they cannot, under

the Constitution, be printed, and that the practicability of circulation must be first determined. And then making the further assumption that tracts on slavery cannot be circulated in certain portions of the country, and tracts on polygamy in certain other portions, he contends that they cannot be printed by the Society without a breach of trust.

Who, then, are "the ignorant, the unenlightened, and the needy," for whom tracts are to be printed and circulated? How ignorant, unenlightened, and needy must a person be to permit the Society to give him a tract without a breach of trust? Did the founders of the Society err when, in 1827, they determined to circulate tracts among the higher classes? When, in 1834, they resolved to furnish every family in the Southern States with tracts, was it only to the ignorant and needy slaves that their thoughts turned, or did they include all southern families among the ignorant and unenlightened? Tracts are intended to instruct, convince, and persuade those who are ignorant and unenlightened as to their duty on moral and religious subjects, however elevated their position and however well instructed in knowledge. If we may judge from the developments that have recently been made, the tracts on dancing, and the use of wine and tobacco, may advantageously be circulated among those who are professedly laboring to enlighten others on these topics.

The next position taken is that the practicability of the circulation of a tract must be ascertained before it can be printed without a breach of trust. This is extending the veto power indeed! It is not enough that tracts shall be calculated to meet the approval of different denominations of evangelical Christians, as we claim; it is not enough that they shall, in fact, commend themselves to the approbation of the individual views of the members of the Publishing Committee, as has been claimed; but they must be approved by everybody! How will this principle operate? Mr. Lord argues that to print tracts on the subject of the moral evils of slavery would be a breach of trust, because they cannot be circulated at the south, assuming this as a fact because the system of slavery exists, to some extent, at the south. We might, with the same

propriety, argue that tracts on dancing, the use of wine and tobacco, cannot be printed without a breach of trust, because they cannot be circulated among the Executive Committee, assuming this to be a fact because we know that these practices are, to some extent, indulged by the members of the Executive Committee. Mr. Lord argues that polygamy cannot be condemned by the Society in its publications, because he assumes that such tracts could not be circulated among the Mormons; and why not for a similar reason suppress tracts on Universal Salvation, on the Divinity of Christ, the Atonement, &c. It is a short argument. Those who do not believe the doctrine of the tracts will not receive them, and those who do believe the doctrine do not need them. Indeed, we are ready to ask of what use to publish tracts on any subject, or of what use any effort to correct the moral evils and vices of sin? The argument must go to this extent; it must put a stop to the American Tract Society, and every other Society which seeks to convince men of error and of wickedness; it must close the Bible, call home our missionaries, shut up our pulpits, and leave the world to its own course. Not so thought the men who planned the American Tract Society. Said Justin Edwards, at the first anniversary meeting of the Society," those truths which God has revealed, in the aspect and connection in which he has revealed them, it is our duty to extend, not merely because we have associated for this purpose, but because God has commanded us to extend them to every creature."

This idea of deciding whether a tract can be circulated before it is printed is a novel one, or rather the idea that any judicious religious tract cannot be circulated, is preposterous. In our number for August, 1858, we said, "If you have any doubt on this point, consult the Annual Reports of the Society, consult any faithful tract distributor in one of our large cities, and you will learn of not one or two, but of a large number of the openly vicious who have refused repeatedly to receive tracts condemning their darling sins, but who at length have been persuaded to accept, to read, to repent and to believe." We had not examined the Annual Reports of the Society for this purpose, we appealed to what every one knows, who