have been agreeably surprised to find that in America the practice is actually that to which my own opinion inclined. I believe that it is a very great mistake to deal with the matter simply by limiting the num ber of public-houses, because the result is to create a monopoly and vested interest in those public-houses which remain.. I should say that in this matter there has been a kind of alliance between those who serve God and those who serve Mammon-between the good people who wish to put down publichouses and the public-house keepers who do not wish any more houses to compete with them. Thus the worshippers of God and the worshippers of Mammon, being united, have been so strong that they have carried everything before them, and the result is that a great monopoly interest has been created. Now, I entirely admit that in rural places where there never has been a public-house it is a very great evil that one should be set up, and that there should be some local power of veto on it; but, on the other hand, I believe that if you have half a dozen public-houses in a street, no reason exists why two or three more should not be allowed, if, in the way of free trade, they are established. On the contrary, it is the existence of a valuable monopoly on the part of the restricted number of houses which makes practically impossible any public action whatever-whether the prohibition of sales, the Gothenburg system, or anything else. I think the first step towards any great measure of reform is to make the trade free, paradox as that may seem; for when you have abolished monopolies

and vested rights which have no right to be, you are then free to act in the public interest. This is the view taken by the Americans. The laws of different States are different-I cannot answer for all-but I inquired in several, and in none of them did I find that there was that disgraceful and demoralising contest for licenses which takes place to such an excessive degree in England, and to some degree in Scotland too. In places where the sale is permitted at all there is no privilege, all the citizens being treated equally; the manufacture is taxed, the sale is taxed, licenses to sell are very heavily taxed; but any man of good character, who submits to the rules and keeps the rules, gets the license under a regular system, without making it a matter of canvassing, or argumentation by lawyers. On the other hand, in certain localities the sale of spirituous liquors is prohibited, not merely the retail in public-houses, but all sales whatever; and that seems to me a much more logical process. I never could reconcile myself to closing the poor man's club and leaving open the shops where the better classes or any other class may supply themselves with liquor to consume at home; nor could I see any reason for giving one grocer a license and prohibiting another. If you prohibit at all, I think you should prohibit all. The Americans have not got Sir Wilfrid Lawson's Permissive Bill. I could not ascertain very exactly the reason for the course which they take, but in many different States they follow the same course, which is this-that when there is a very strong wish to prohibit the sale of

liquors in any particular locality a bill for that purpose is brought in and passed by the local State Legislature. I presume that, being so treated, the question does not absolutely turn upon a mere local majority, but if there are objectors they have an opportunity of being heard, after which the Home Rule Parliament of the particular State decides as it thinks best; and it is undoubtedly the case that in almost every State in which I inquired a number of such bills are passed, and under them the sale of liquors is prohibited in considerable localities. Sometimes, but not very often, the bill takes the shape of giving an option to the particular locality to be determined by vote. My own opinion tends very much to prohibition, though I feel that the world generally is not ripe for it yet. I should, however, be very glad to see an experiment made in particular localities which are pretty well united in wishing for it. On that ground I would gladly see some measure embodying the principle of vesting a power somewhere to stop the sale of liquors in particular localities when the general sense of the population desires it; although I do not know that I would let a mere majority impose such a measure on a large and reluctant minority.

RELIGION.

I had expected to find America overrun by newfangled ideas in religion, but it did not appear to be so. By far the larger portion of the people adhere

to the good old-fashioned Churches, or perhaps in many cases I should say to an old-fashioned Congrega tional system, for there seems to be a great disposition to Congregationalism in the United States. The Episcopalians are but a small minority. The most impor tant sects are the Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists; but it seems to me that in America there is much inclination among religious sects which do not differ in essentials to come together on common ground. The Young Men's Christian Associations-which are, I believe, unsectarian-are widely spread in the country, and do excellent work. The number of Irish who go to America is so great that, added to a number of Southern Germans, they make a considerable Catholic population. But I do not think that that religion is suited to the genius of the people of America, white or black. The Catholics do not make progress. The blacks do not at all accept them. In their own way these blacks are an exceedingly religious Christian people; but it strikes me as a sad thing that the black and the white Churches are now entirely sepa rated from one another. The blacks have now everywhere set up black preachers, who do not preach at all badly. Their congregations sing exceedingly well, and they are more in earnest than most white people.

Although, as I have said, one sees very little of the very new-fangled religions, there are a good many divisions and subdivisions of the old sects in different parts of the country. In the great hotels in the cities of the interior one sees a board with a list of the various Churches, and they are certainly pretty

numerous. However, one recognises most of them. The only prevalent sect (especially in the West) which struck me as novel was one called simply Christians,' or sometimes' Campbellites,' having been founded by a Campbell. They claim to be unsectarian Christians. I thought I should like to belong to that persuasion.

I was anxious to know how people get on in America without an Established Church-whether they are the worse for that want. We have all been a good deal exercised on that subject. I have had much difficulty in making up my mind on it. I have had an old affection for the Scotch Establishment which I cannot very easily surrender. It is not that I have had any high-flying ideas about the union of Church and State and the advantage of clothing the Church in purple and fine linen, and making her a ruler of men; I believe that nothing could be more contrary to the Spirit of Christianity, nothing worse for the Church or worse for the State than that; and if I had any doubt about that, what I have seen on the Continent of Europe has quite solved all those doubts. But I have thought, and I think still, that if we were all of one religion it might be much better to combine to maintain a common minister paid by rates-and teinds or tithes are nothing but an old form of rates -just as we find it better to maintain a common school by rates—rather than allow ministers to depend upon the bounty of their congregations, and especially of the richer among their congregations. We in Scotland seem to have satisfied ourselves that this is