We have no hesitation in calling this a false acorua tion—ministers and people being, with exceptions so few as not to bo worth reckoning, one in holding evangelical sentiment* to be their life and not a vain superstition, — but ire may accept it as descriptive of the process by which Mr. Cranbrook has, whether with or without intention, disguised in Edinburgh the doctrinei which he now avows, and which he says he held in substance from the first. Now if we call this " immoral," it is not that we wish to press hard on Mr. Cranbrook, but that we wish distinctly to reprobate such a procedure, by whomsoever praotised. "To falsify a word for any man under the smn (Mr. Cranbrook, has well said) is to engender the parasite of error in the teacher's inmost nature." But this is what he has been com* polled to do, on his own showing, as a pastor of an Independent Church. Even the most tolerant and cultured Churches, "few and far bet vreen, " require the " ring of certain words," he says, whether these are true to the pastor's own thoughts or not. And in the majority of congregations many _ tit-bits of evangelical sentiment ,must be thrown into the dis course to stop the mouths of " ignorant and vulgar people." And yet to the position which requires a course so injurious to a man's own moral health, and which in plain words must be called a practical cheat, Mr. Cranbrook has clung until he has been compelled to give it up. And when compelled to give it up he can find no words too contemptuous to describe those who hare laid on him so healthful a necessity, and wins the cheers of a Sunday evening assembly in the Hopetoun Rooms, by saying that " Independents have their minister's thoughts free from' a dreed, in order that they might be controlled by an ignorant mob.". The claim set up by Mr. Cranbrook, though in the name of free thought, is absolutely tyrannous. 