of the church in front of the communion rails.
Nor was this all. About twenty or five-and-twenty
minutes having elapsed after the conclusion
of the lecture, and the moment of
the commencement of the Litany having
arrived, the entrance of the clergyman was
saluted by a storm of hissing and groaning very
painful to hear anywhere; but especially so
in a church. About this mob, too, there
seemed to be something stupid. There they
stood, contented with blocking up the place,
but not stopping the service. There, too,
they stood when the Litany was concluded,
and while the organist, who appeared to have
selected the longest and noisiest voluntary
from his collection, endeavoured to play them
out. They were not to be played out, however,
and evidently seemed to think it excellent
sport to stand there howling out words
of their own to the tune played upon the
organ.

Now surely it must be obvious to every one
that such a state of things as this ought to be,
under any circumstances, impossible. If, on
the one hand, as is assuredly the case, a grave
responsibility is on the shoulders of any person
who can be so inconceivably and supernaturally
weak as to offend and outrage a congregation
among whom his ministrations might be useful,
for the sake of paltry trifles, unimpressive and
foolish in the last degree, and wholly without
value—if it is monstrous in an educated man, as
indeed it is, to persist in saying one sentence
with his face to the east, and another with his
face to the west, and to twist his honest Master of
Arts hood into the nearest attainable
resemblance to the back view of a chasuble, when he
knows he is giving offence to many persons,
besides exposing his own fatuity—if these things
are preposterous and childish, and even, under
the circumstances, wicked, does the blame stop
here?

Does none attach, in such a case, to the parish
authorities? Ought these disgraceful scenes to
be possible in a church under any conceivable
circumstances? Is not this a case in which the
police should act as they would in other buildings?
Surely where there is plenty of room to sit down,
and an abundance of empty pews, people have
no right to fill the aisles and the chancel of the
church, to their complete blocking up. Surely,
when a pew is made to hold six persons, and
twelve are found in it, half that number are
subject to removal. Surely persons standing on
benches in a church may be made to sit down,
and those who hiss and groan and talk loudly
may be taken out. If this question could
not have been settled by a mere handful of
policemen in plain clothes, then would it
not have been right, until it is finally
decided what form of worship shall be adopted
in this unhappy church, and who shall be
listened to and who not, that St. George's-in-the-East
should be shut up, and so this scandal
avoided?

In this particular case the worst is now over,
but such difficulties may arise .again (through the
similar folly or obstinacy of one person) in other
parishes, and there may be a recurrence of such
scenes.

The Eye-witness, tired out and disgusted,
left that great and foolish crowd still standing
and blocking up the church long after
the organ (which had been for half an hour
roaring at the top of its strength to drown their
noise) had ceased to play. The din of this
instrument, and the heat produced by the mass
of people inside the church, made the E. W.
only too glad to get out, though it was to find
himself in a fresh mob. This mob appeared to
be engaged in discussing theology.

The outside crowd showed no inclination to
disperse. It was cut up into little knots, and
here was very manifest the advantage possessed
by the talking members of the mob over the
silent members; these last surrounding the first,
and looking on in open-mouthed admiration,
which was never the least diminished, but rather
increased, by their inability to understand what
it was all about. There was one very curious
characteristic of this scene. The different
orators by no means confined themselves to
the subject of the day. Indeed, the disturbances
in the church appeared to be quite lost
sight of; the speakers having seized this as
a good opportunity for hearing themselves talk,
and for promulgating their own theories, whaever
they might happen to be. Approaching one
group, the Eye-witness finds a stout gentleman
discoursing on church-rates, while the centre of
the next mass of listeners is holding forth upon
the unjust division of property; and, to judge by
his appearance, it must doubtless seem to him to
be very unjust indeed, uncommonly little having
fallen to his share. The muscular gentleman in
black, with the hymn-book in his hand, is limiting
the number of those who hold the truth to
some half a dozen (self included); while the
very ill-looking man with the pale lips and the
passionate face, with the scar on his forehead
and with the alpaca coat, is enforcing an argument
on teetotalism with a ship's steward, and
who appears to enjoy the confidence of the
bystanders to a very great extent, and (if fat is
worth) to deserve it.

The argument did not originate with the fat
steward and the evil-faced man, but with this
last and a thin, small-headed man. But the
steward, cutting into the discourse, was at
once encouraged to represent the constituency,
and the man with the small face was tacitly
invited to retire and accept the Chiltern
Hundreds.

"You're discussing this here question wrong,"
broke in the steward; "just let me have a word
or two."

"Hear him!" said a fat and silent auditor.

"You will allow me to remark," said the evil-
faced man, the hand which he lifted in deprecation
trembling violently with anger, " that I am
arguing with tiiis gentleman" (pointing to him
of the small countenance), " and not with
you."

"He can't make nothing of it," the steward