The advantage of American above English Congregationalism was apparent in the sessions devoted to questions of polity and organization. Congregationalism is more indigenous to the institutions of this country than to those of England. It has had therefore more scope in social and political affairs. It has had also greater opportunities for administrative effect. The rapid expansion of the country has called into play the inventive side of religious activity, and developed a great variety of "means" not known elsewhere because unnecessary. All this, as characteristic of American Congregationalism, was set forth in the admirable address by Mr. Fullerton, on the part which Congregationalism had taken in the making of New England and of the United States; in the more technical but highly informing papers by Drs. Quint and Ross on the economy of Congregationalism; and in the vigorous and enthusiastic speeches of several of the American delegates representing the various missionary organizations of the denomination, and the work of societies like the Christian Endeavor. - The interest of the Council seems to have culminated in the session set apart for the discussion of social and economic questions, though of discussion in the sense of debate there was none, and no difference of opinion was developed. A striking personal contribution to the meeting was made in the speech by Ben Tillett, a day-laborer, one of the most prominent among the labor leaders in London, and a member of an East London Congregational church. The speech was without bitterness, but alive with passion in its urgency for action. "We are always inquiring, always searching, yet we never do any work, always analyzing, yet never altering. We want some moral force brought to bear that shall give momentum to altruistic principles, some power brought to bear to break the hard crust of sordid greed. I know of no humanitarian effort so potent in rationalizing influences as the Christianity that can lend itself to practical every-day life. Statesmen require neither knowledge nor evidence, for they are surfeited with both already. Neither do we require conviction; the lame excuses of the rich testify that they realize their wickedness. Let us develop a conscience alive and responding to all generous instincts; a Christly sanity in judgment; a religion warm and merciful, pulsating with heroic nobleness, breathing out life and soul, rebuking and chastening all sins-conventional or unconventional — whose ultimate results mean misery." Dr. Gladden gave a terse, axiomatic review of the present economic situation, out of which has come that "social residuum which furnishes the real problem of Christian statesmanship," and then discussed the remedy. To individualism he conceded the initiative in all enterprise, but would not pause to refute its selfish and heartless conclusions. To socialism he denied any further relief than that effected by the use of the state to equalize taxation, extirpate monopolies, and to resume corporate powers which have been unwisely surrendered to private parties. The real and only remedy is in the application of Christianity to industry and trade. "Mr. Carnegie's idea is the prevalent one, a man must be an industrialist while he is making his fortune, and a socialist after it is made; is it not better that he should be a Christian all the while? So I, for one, believe; and if it is true, then the Church of God has no more urgent business just now than to convince the world that it is true. The effect of believing it would be a quiet industrial revolution. It would not abolish private property, but it would enforce the obligation to administer private property for the public good. It would preserve the individual initiative in business, but it would put an end to industrial feudalism. The employer, with this law fixed in his mind, could no longer insist that his business was his individual affair; he would know that his employees were his business partners. The employee, instructed in this wisdom, would cease to regard his employer as his natural enemy, and would begin to think of him as the captain to whom his loyalty was due, his leader in the ways of welfare. Such tempers must conduct to the adoption, in some form, of the principle of industrial partnership, the end of the feud between laborer and employer, the practical identification of their interests." The sessions of the Council, extending from July 13th to the 21st, were crowded with prepared exercises, while all the intervals between seemed to have been utilized to the fullest extent in social festivities. Much of the time was taken up- far too much for any succeeding Council — in a comparison of views, and far too little time was reserved for the free discussion of the greater subjects. As a result, we miss any enunciation of principles, corresponding, for example, to the deliverance of the Lambeth Conference on the unity of the church. And we miss equally any serious exhortation to the churches on the trementlous issues involved in the present social distress. We content ourselves — for the outcome in this direction is very assuring— with a large increase of practical Congregational fellowship, and with a considerable widening of opinion and faith throughout the Congregational churches. What the churches of this country have needed during the past few years has been a change of atmosphere; and we doubt not that the more mellow though not less vital religious climate of England will prove to have produced a healthful effect. A more important if not more interesting question than, What the Council accomplished? is the question, What it represented? It is not enough to say that it represented Congregationalism. For Congregationalism has not of late years presented itself before the religious world in the large and well-defined proportions of the great Protestant bodies. Its power has been recognized and acknowledged in its indirect ef fects, its social, educational, and political influence, but it has lost ground relatively as a polity. A correspondent of "The Guardian," the organ of the English Church, writing in criticism of the Council, asks why Congregationalism in the United States, which had the start and the ground, has allowed all the newer organizations to outstrip it; and, further, why it has not gained upon Congregationalism in England, where the conditions are seemingly adverse. The answer of the correspondent to the latter question is, that Congregationalism needs the stimulus of controversy and oppression to give it growth and vitality. "It looks as if American Congregationalism just needed the stimulating influences which English Independency finds in the struggle with what its orators call a persecuting church. Any way, it is a fact of no little significance that the more political form of Independency which exists in England presents a stronger front to the world than does the sister denomination in the States. We would not for one moment say that Congregationalism in England is nothing more than a political organization, having for its highest aim the overthrow of the church, yet the facts revealed in the International Council, in regard to Independency in America, do more than suggest that the political character of Congregationalism at home. constitutes a most important and powerful factor in its history. Not only does it form the stronger part of its aggressive action, but it gives a certain cohesion, directness, and force to a religious system which, when deprived of all political associations, fails, under the most favorable conditions, to achieve a success at all equal to that which is reached by the younger and less favored sects." Various answers might be given to the first question proposed, more or less explanatory of the comparatively slow growth of Congregationalism in the United States, the early Unitarian defection and controversy, the period of dallying with Presbyterianism, which lost the great Middle States to Congregationalism; and the exclusion from the South while slavery was a religious question, still the fact remains that Congregationalism as a polity has not been able to compete with the more highly organized denominations. The Baptist churches, which are largely congregational in form, have, indeed, become very numerous, but no one would claim that polity, rather than ritual, accounts for their growth. What, then, does Congregationalism represent as a polity, especially in the United States? We think that it represents two things, each of which is a very pronounced factor in the religious life of the people. First, it is proving itself a natural form of Christian association and development in the newer parts of the country. Where the conditions are free and elastic, where the people come together from various sources and with varying religious habits, the natural basis of union is Congregationalism. Congregationalism is proving itself a conserving and saving force in the rush of immigration into the newer States; and its growth there, as compared with its previous growths, is phenomenal; and this later growth, it is to be remembered, is religious, not chiefly educational or political, though the Congregationalism of the newer West is loyal in these respects to the New England traditions. And, second, Congregationalism is a potent factor in the more highly organized bodies. It lives and asserts itself under absorption. It marks a distinct line of cleavage in the bodies which have seemed to gain at its expense. Methodism has drawn little if anything from Congregationalism, and is therefore undisturbed by the Congregational element. Still it acknowledges Congregationalism as an outside disturbing force by the increasing draft upon its younger ministry into the Congregational ranks. But of Presbyterianism and Episcopacy it may fairly be said that they are divided by the Congregational principle. Congregationalism is present in each body, and active under every undue assertion of institutionalism. Occasionally it takes the aggressive in the revision of creeds and in the election of bishops. No one has measured Congregationalism in America who has left out the vast influence which it at present exerts in its protest within the more ecclesiastical bodies against the tyranny of institutionalism. And in any efforts toward Church Unity this element, within all the various denominations, must be reckoned with, quite as much as that which remains without, and organized into Congregational churches. JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL. THE death of James Russell Lowell on the 12th of August deprives America of her representative man of letters, and of intelligent, patriotic, independent citizenship. The range of his activities was not confined to literature; his achievements were widespread in their character and influence. The versatility of his talents is the striking characteristic of his distinguished career. As moral reformer, university professor, magazine editor, diplomat, public speaker, literary, social, and political essayist, and poet, he has won a richly merited fame. In a passing word concerning his services as professor, editor, and diplomat, it is sufficient to say, without detraction, that his professorial and diplomatic career will leave no lasting mark. His lectures on BellesLettres in the University, especially the inspiring course on Dante, are still referred to with enthusiasm by the few Harvard men who listened to them. Many of us, who were not privileged to enjoy that good fortune, pleasantly remember the gracious manner in which he met our occasional appeals for counsel and information. As the nation's minister to Spain, and subsequently to England, he entered into congenial fields for the study of literature and the philosophy of government. Little opportunity was afforded him in either country for any display of the special gifts of diplomacy. At the court of St. James he was a splendid social success. His elegant culture, charming urbanity of deportment, sturdy American patriotism, and remarkable ability as a speaker on festive and literary occasions, gained him the high and just appreciation of all classes of English society. No man has contributed more to the development of the present good feeling which exists between England and America than Mr. Lowell. It was his cherished hope that the two nations would some day be united by the establishment of a supreme tribunal. "It is a beautiful dream," he said, "but it is none the worse for that. Many of the best things we have began by being dreams." His editorial labors covered a period of fourteen years. When the "Atlantic Monthly " was instituted he reluctantly consented to be its first editor. For five years he continued in that capacity with conspicuous success. He was afterwards associated with Charles Eliot Norton in the of the "North American Review" for nine years. very able conduct Though doing much of the world's work, he was rarely seen in the world's ways. He was not one to command an eager enthusiasm amongst the people; the people scarcely knew him by sight. Nevertheless, there are few men who will be more sensibly missed by cultivated minds as a stimulating, moulding, and fruitful influence upon their life and thought. Happily for them, and for succeeding generations of those who more or less will lead the intellectual life, the essential qualities and products of his genius are treasured up within the goodly volumes of his personally edited published works. As to these writings, it is not an uninteresting question whether Lowell has bequeathed a legacy of prose and verse which will "resist the flow of time." It is less a matter of serious interest whether his true fame will rest upon his achievements as poet or as critic. Beyond controversy, Nature lavishly endowed him with the susceptible imagination of the poet and the judicial intellect of the critic. He owed his original position in the world of letters to his poetry, perhaps, more strictly speaking, to his humorous and satirical poetry. The seriousness and depth of his thinking was strengthened with the varied experience of his advancing years; and his increasing care for form and finish resulted long ago in making him a consummate artist of poetic expression. For years he had enjoyed the distinction of being the cherished poet of men of literary culture. But while his poetic faculty had more than forty years of productive energy, we may justly claim for Lowell equal eminence as a prose-writer. The consensus of competent opinion awards him the title of ranking amongst the first critical essayists of his time. Not that he is to be thought of as the literary successor of the French Sainte-Beuve. Sainte-Beuve has had no successor. Lowell had not such profound insight as Emerson, and he was surpassed in originality and brilliancy by Edwin Percy Whipple. In the variety and general character of his gifts and achievements he had more in common with Matthew Arnold and John Morley. But Arnold had not Lowell's gifts of diplomacy; and Morley, with all his genius for rhythm, lacks "the accomplishment of verse." Lowell's qualities of graceful and effective public speech are perhaps matched in Morley, while Arnold's attempts at public speaking were unmitigatedly bad. Keen satirist as Lowell was, he had not Arnold's gift of sustained |