OPENING OF THE ATHEN2EUM ON SUNDAYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1159, 14 February 1874, Page 11

OPENING OF THE ATHEN2EUM ON SUNDAYS.

According to announcement, a special meeting of subscribers to the Athenaeum was held on Wednesday. The meeting was called for the lower hall of the Athenaeum, but it was generally understood that the proceedings were to be conducted in the Drill Shed. The Chairman (Mr A. D. Lubecki) opened the business in the Athenaeum Hall, and an adjournment was afterwards made to the Head-quarters Drill Shed. The large room there was very closely packed, and close upon two-thirds of the subscribers must have been present.

The Chairman opened the proceedings by stating that no doubt all present were aware that a resolution was passed at the recent annual meeting of subscribers in favour of opening the reading-room for four hours on Sundays. Some members who opposedtheresolution, believing chat it did not represent the views of a majority of the subscribers, requested the Secretary to call a general meeting to re-consider the question. The present meeting was held for that purpose. He would take this opportunity of informing those who might not be aware of the fact, that at the close of the last meeting he received a protest signed by Dr Stuart and others against his (the chairman's) ruling, that as the resolution did not alter any existing bye-law, it was not necessary that it should be carried by two-thirds. Since receiving the protest he had taken the opinion of a barrister on the subject, and that opinion fully endorsed the correctness of the ruling. — (Applause ) He had also to state that he had received a letter from His Honour the Superintendent on the question before the meeting, which, with the permission of those present, he would read as published in the newspapers. (The Chairman then read His Honour's letter published in our last issue, concluding amid loud cheering.) The Chairman then concluded by saying that he trusted the question at issue would be fairly discussed on its merits, and that no personalities would be indulged in. Mr I. N. Watt took exception to the meeting. Under the regulations of the Institution the Secretary had power to call a meeting, and he therefore was not throwing any blame on the Secretary. But he wished to draw attention to the fact that in all deliberative assemblies, when a motion was once disposed of it could not be brought up again during the same session. He took it that one year might be regarded as their session, and he contended that a matter already decided could not be again brought forward during the same year. — (Hear, hear, applause, and oh, oh.) He might point out that whatever decision theycaine to to-night, another meeting might be called for the same purpose in a week, aud they would then be just in the same position.

The Rev. Dr Stuart asked if the Committee had taken any action in the protest he had lodged. The Chairman replied that the Committee had taken no action whatever. At the last Committee meeting he showed the protest to the Committee, but no action was taken. He (the Chairman) had himself taken the opinion of a barrister.— ("Name, name," and " Head it.") He did not think it necessary to name the gentleman. — ("No, no," and " Name.") He was an English barrister, and a gentleman occupying a high position in the Province.

Mr S'iout rose to a point of order. The meeting was not called to consider the protest lodged It wa3 called for the purpose of moving two resolutions, and unless notice that the protest was to be considered was given, it would be informal to do so.

The llev. Dr Stuart said that granting sucb to be the case, he would ask was it the ruling of the Chairman that a majority could compel the Committeetoopen the Athenaeum, The ruling of the Chairman the other evsningwas that a majority of the voters present would ju&tify or compel the Committee to op-sn the Athenaeum on Sundays. — (Plear. ) He wanted to know if that was the ruling. The Chairman said that if Dr Stuart uncle stood him in that way it was a misapprehension. All he (the Chairman) said was that the resolution did not amend any bye law, consequently it was unnecessary for it to be carried by two-thirds of the members. He looked upon the vote merely as an expression of opinion on the part of the general body of the subscribers for the guidance of the Committee. Of course, it had no lee;al Aveight -it was not legally binding on the Committee — but he presumed it was morally binding. It remained for the Committee to say whether they would carry out the views of the members as expressed at the last or at the present meeting, The Jiev. Dr Stuart was sorry that his obtusencss gave so much trouble, but many present at the meeting came to the same conclusion as himself, namely, that the Chairman's ruling was to the effect that a majority would have justified the Committee in initiating a change so radical — so fundamental — as the opening of the Athenaeum on Sundays. After some further discussion, Mr E. B. Carciill came forward and said he would move the first resolution — " That the Institute be not opened on Sundays." — (Loud applause and some hisses.) He could not agree with the very strict rules laid down by Mr Watt, nor could ho see the danger or likelihood of their getting meetings like the present one once a week. He hoped the decision they

would arrive at to-night would be Batisfactory, and would finally settle the question. The purpose of the meeting was to elicit from the members of the Athenaeum a more distinct and satisfactory declaration of their views as to the proposed change of opening the Institution on Sundays. He did not know whether many had come prepared to urge the point at length, or whether any large number were prepared to be influenced by any arguments which might be used. Possibly, a good many had come with their minds fully made up. At the same time, they might fairly look at the question as it now came before them, and endeavour to see what were the reasons put forward for what must be regarded as a radical change in the management of the Institution. The Athenaeum had been in existence for a good many years, and they had the uniform testimony of the yearly report? that its affairs had been conducted satisfactorily. They now had a proposal to make a change, which, it was said, would meet the convenience of a certain number of members, but which was opposed very strongly upon conscientious grounds by a very large number of members. He thought that those members who were attempting to introduce this radical change should be prepared with some strong reasons indeed before they ventured to give effect to it. Of course, there were those who took extreme views on both sides of the question. Possibly, there might be a good number present who were swayed one way or the other by the advice of their friends, or by the arguments used, not having hitherto taken a very deep interest in the matter. One thing was quite clear, however, that as the matter came to be more closely looked at, it was regarded with a great deal more interest by both sides than was anticipated. He doubted whether the gentlemen who brought forward the resolution would have done so quite so readily had they known that it would be opposed so strenuously as it had been. That perhaps was not the place to discuss a religious question — (hear, hear) — any more perhaps than the columns of a newspaper — at any rate, in the sense of bringing forward and discussing on its merits any particular dogma of religion ; but he took it that whether there or elsewhere they were bound to avow themselves as belonging to and as members of the Christian Church, and as bound by the rules of that Church to which they belonged. — (Hear, hear.) Among those who were opposed to opening the Athenaeum on Sunday were all those who held by the obligation of the Decalogue as to the sacredness of the Sahbath day. Of course, that should comprise the members of most Christian Churches. It was not for him as a Presbyterian to discuss the question of the propriety or otherwise of keeping holy the Sabbath day. He had been instructed from his youth upwards that that was an obligation imposed upon him as a member of the Christian Church. He supposed the same might be said of the members of the Church of England, who had written up over their Communion-table the Ten Commandments, and part of whose regular services it was to conclude the reading of the Commandments with the prayer, "Lord have mercy upon us, aud incline us to keep this law." — (Applause.) He took it that the same ground mu&t be occupied by the members of the Weslevan, Baptist, and Independent Churches. Witn few exceptions, probably the members of all those Churches would hold themselves bound by it — that it was a sacred obligation. There was a difference of opinion perhaps as to the meaning of keeping the Sabbath day holy— (hear, hear, and applause) —and those differences might be pretty wide, going on one side to the extent of a somewhat Pharisaic sanctimoniousness in the observance of the Sabbath ; and goinp, on the other side, to an extreme degree of laxity and neglect of anything like Sabbath observance. But there should surely be a common feeling among the members of those Churches in desiring to respect one another, and not to do anything which would hurt the others' consciences.— (Applause.) He held, therefore, that all those who occupied this position should hold themselves bound to regard with very great tenderness any objpetion made to a change of this sort, upon the ground of its being against the conscientious scruples of those at one with them ; but ho could not thiuli it the part of any Christian man to seek to force a movement of this kind against the scruples of those who took an opposite view for so very small a cause — so utterly small a cause — as was alleged on the other side. — (Applause.) Now, what had they got on the other side ? He did not believe there were many men in their community distinctly opposed to the rules of Christianity altogether. There might be a few — doubtless there were some in every community — but they must be very small in number ; and whoever they were, and whatever were thoir numbers, he did not think that on a question of this kind they were bound to show their views any respect at all. — (Applause; "Oh, oh!" hisses, and prolonged confusion.) The Chairman trusted the meeting would give Mr Cargill a fair hearing.— (Hear, hear. ) Every member of the Athenaeum was entitled to express his opinion, and he trusted there would be no more interruption. M< Cakuill said he was sorry that he had trodden unwittingly on sore toes. He did not think there wera many corns of that sort in the meeeting. But he would say again that for men who were opposed to Christianity, and opposed to everything bearing the name of religion, he had no respect, and ho could not be guided by their opinion — (Hear, hear, and hisses.) In any matter where he could exercise control he would treat their opinions with unconcern, and he

hoped the majority of the meeting would do bo. Then on the other side there were those who did not take that view at all — who had a respect for religious things, but who claimed to regard the Sabbath as something abrogated, and which did not belong to us. — (Hear, hear.) As he had already said, be did not know to what branch of the Church those people belonged ; but he knew that whatever Church they belonged to, they were not true to that Church, and ought not to belong to it. — (Oh, oh, and "Question.") Then, thirdly, they had those who acknowledged the sacredness of the Sabbath, but only grounded their differences upon their view of the manner of holding the day sacred. It was to that class that he would particularly appeal, and it was only with those that he could expect any argument used to-night could have effect, because he thought they might fairly appeal to all those who viewed the matter in that light that they should not for a small cause do violence to tbose whose scruples they were bound to respect. And he would just say that from the very great animus manifested in this matter — the great animus manifested in the writings of the Press and elsewhere, and the great apparent triumph with which the resolution was carried at last meeting. — (Oh, oh.) He was not present, but he was told that the successful side jumped on the forms, hurrahed, and waved their hats —(laughter) — as if they gained a very great triumph. A Voice : That was before the voting. Mr Cargill : And a triumph over what? A Voice : Over bigotry and superstition. — (Laughter. ) Mr Oargill said he must say that he thought those persons who occupied that middle position were in danger, if they permitted themselves to be led by this movement, of being dragged into lengths they had no idea of going at present. — (Oh !) So much for the religious aspect. Looking at the question from a mere secular point of view, he held that this matter concerned every member of the Athenaeum, and more particularly the working classes. — (Hear, hear.) Those men who might not have everything they could desire in their own houses should hold out strongly against any attempt to take away the smallest part of the Sabbath day. He agreed with what the Superintendent said in his letter, that the maintenance of the Sabbath in its integrity was one of the bulwarks of civil and religious liberty — (applause) — and touched the interests of the working classes very much. He would say that it behoved every member of the community to stand up for the maintenance of the Sabbath as one of their best privileges and greatest blessings. Therefore he hoped that tho meeting would see its way to carry by a large majority the resolution he had moved.

Mr M 'Greg or had very much pleasure in seconding the motion. He hoped the wot Icing men would maintain the Sabbath, and resist any encroachment upon it. Mr Watt pointed out that the resolution moved by Mr Oargill was a negative one, and the meeting would not therefore have an opportunity of moving amendments upon it as they might desire. He would suggest that it should Le put in the affirmative form, so that the meeting 1 might not be hampered in coming to a decision. Mr Cargill explained that he did not draw up the motion, but he did not think it was competent to alter it. The motion he had moved was the one of which notice had been given by advertisement, and ho was afraid that if another were substituted, Mr Watt would come forward and say that no notice had been given of the resolution. -(Applause. ) After some further discussion,

Mr B. Isaac said that it was with some diffidence that he "arose" to a point of order — (loud laughter) — because he was of a different persuasion to many of those present. He thought, however, they would all admit that those of his persuasion had held the Sunday institutions of the land in which they lived as sacred as they did their own Sabbath. But he did not agree with those bigoted men who said that the Sunday was to be observed in a clumsy, awkward, and miserable manner. If there was one point that he wouid be found voting against as au upholder of the Sabbath or Sunday, it would be voting against travelling or working on that day. But when ho saw Sunday Schools established amongst thum — and very wisely — where the minds of the y>«ung were cultivated, he did not sec why the Athenaeum should not be opened. He did not see why those of superior intellect only should be allowed to improve themselves and keep progi easing. For that reason ho would oppose the resolution. He did not see why numbers of working-men — numbers of men locked up in lodgings — travellers coming into the place — and many men who had no comfortable homos — should be prohibited from using the Institution to which they subscribed. He believed that the opening of the Institution would effect much good, and that many who t iok to railway travelling, and to frequenting public houses — (hear) — would be found on Sundays in the reading-room spending a comfortable hour or so improving their minds, and making a better futuie for themselves. He was surprised to lind Dr Roseby btating that the weariaomencss of reading would .send the frequenters of the readiug-room on Sundays to the tap-room and the commercial-room. He would ask that gentleman if his sermons had such an eifect? — (Laughter and hear.) Although ho approved of going to Church, and he did so himself, he knew that many who went to places of worship were often very anxious to get out of them, and were often tired of what they heard there. If he thought there was any danger of the libra-

rian being obliged to work on Sundays, he would go himself as a Jew, and enter into an agreement to attend to the Athenaeum on Sundays for three years. Mr Robert Gillies said that he had not intended to come forward prominently at this meeting, but he thought the moving of an amendment might probably get rid of some of the points of order that had been brought forward. He was not one of those who were present at the last meeting — he was up country at the time — nor was he one of those who had written in the papers on this subject. He claimed to come to that meeting with as much charity in regard to this subject as any gentleman present, and he desired to speak on the subject with as much charity as was possible in every way. — (A laugh.) He hoped that if a single word dropped from him which was not in that spirit, the meeting would at once check him. For various reasons he was not one of those who would have taken the lead in bringing forward a resolution for opening the reading-room on Sundays. But the reason which had influenced him in coming forward to express his opinions on the matter was simply this: As he read the published accounts of the meeting, the main reason brought forward for the opposition to this movement was based upon the ground of principle and as a matter of conscience. — (Hear, hear.) That was the ground on which it was based by the mover of the motun to-night. As a religious man, as he claimed to be — (laughter) — as a Christian man, as he trusted he was — they might believe it or not, as they pleased — (laughter) — he failed to see that any principle was involved. — (Hear.) He would like to ask those gentlemen where the principle was involved ? They had not shown it. He would ask them to take the subject as discussed in the Bible or the New Testament — to take any single instance that there related to the Sabbath— and to put it alongside this question of opening the read-ing-room for the convenience of their youth, and the benefit of wayfarers, and then let them say if their Blessed Lord and Master would not have said — as he did say when he cured die man with the withered hand — that it would be doing good ? — (Loud applause.) The mover of the motion had challenged 'the Presbyterians, Wetleyans, and members of the Church of England who were in favour of this proposed change. Well, he could say nothing as to the other bodies ; but as a Presbyterian he would say — and he would say it without fear of contradiction — that there was nothing in the tenets of the Presbyterian Church thai; would for one moment prevent the opening of the reading-room for four hours on Sunday. — (" Oh," and loikl and continued applause,) — He was a Presbyterian. — (A Voice : No.) He believed in the principles of Presbyterian-

in. — (" No.") Well, he came to the meeting expecting to be abused — (laughter)— but he could challenge the man who said "No" to come forward and show that he had done as much for the Presbyterian Church as he (Mr Gillies) had. He valued his Presbyterianism, but he valued something more, and that was truth. — (Hear, hear.) There was a truth which lay at the root of this matter, and that was that no man should bind upon other men's consciences that which God. had not made binding. The Superintendent had alluded to the fact that the keeping of the Sabbath lay at the root of their institutions — civil and religious. He (Mr Gillies) would also s»y that it was a great bulwark ; but the question under discussion had no rela J ion to the keeping of the Sabbath.— (Oh. ) Would any man say that the opening of a quiet readingroom, where young men could go in and read without fear of interruption, would be breaking the Sabbath? In the course of eonversatnns he had had with the principal leaders of this opposition, he did not find a single one who would say that this was a matter of principle —(Oh.) They were found putting forward the idea that this was the beginning of the letting in of water — that this was the first step towards some undefined evil which would afterwards overwhelm the community. But he could say that the time to meet that difficulty was when it arose. — (Laughter and applause.) He maintained that the friends of religion were raising this question on a false issue — (no, and hear, hear) — and were doing an injury to the cause. Therefore, he came forward to say that as far as he was concerned he thought the proposal was right in itself. But whenever it went wrong he claimed an equal right with anybody else to pi event it. The amendment which he intended to propose was one which he thought no one who valued the Sabbath could have any objections to support, because it would hedge the matter in a measure from the objections which many had urged against it, namely, that it would necessitate the employment of the Librarian on Sunday, and would encroach upon the hours of Sabbath worship. Ihe amendment was as follows :■ —

That as some members of the Athenaeum living in liotols, aud others, are greatly inconvenienced for want of a proper reading room where on Sundays they could read without interruption, the Committee are authorised to open the reading room for four hours on Sunday, sis an experiment ; but should they find, after fair trial, that only a simll number of those for whoso benefit it is designed avail themselves of it, or that otherwise it proves in imy wav injurious fco the institution, they are authorised in their own discretion to abandon the exponmont. In any case, however, it is hereby doclarod th.it on no account are cny of the employes to bo forced or induced to give their attendanco on Sundays, nor are the hours of opening to be such as 'will interfere in any way with the usual hours of public worship. Ho had only a few more words to say. It had been said that there was no necessity for this step, and a much-respected, friend ot hia

— Dr Stuart— had said that young men had at least their bed-rooms to read in on the Sabbath. He (Mr Gillies) could only say, from his own experience of living in a hotel in Duned'n, before he had a home of his own, that the reading-room would be a great boon to the young men of Dunedin on Sundays. He was sure that if, instead of stopping this movement, the religious men in the community would only step in and direct it aright they would be doing an immense service. He could say further, that there were scores of travellers visiting these shores who did not know what to do with themselves on Sundays. Anyone could go into a public reading-room or library in a hotel, and calling for a glass of beer, could read novels, or, if he liked, his Bible but hb was liable to constant interruption. ' But the Athenaeum reading-room was a place where no one could encroach upon another's time. One objection tha*: might be raised to the amendment was that it was putting too much on the shoulders of the Committee. But he contended that the Committee were the proper parties to act, and decide in this matter. The members might give an expression of opinion, but it ■was the Committee, and the Committee alone who were responsible for the proper conduct of the Institution and for its success, and they alone should have power in other matters.— (No, and hear.) If they did wrong in one way or another, they could be brought to account at the annual meeting. If their actions proved beneficial, they would receive the thanks of the members; but if their action proved deleterious, they would have the members' condemnation. Therefore, he Baid that the Committee were the proper parties to act. He had stated that there was a necessity for this step. He was not at all sure that there was a very great necessity for it— (hear)— but he did not think there was anyone of them who could be sure on that point.— (Hear. ) TV ell, how were they to arrive at that ? It was only by trying the experiment for a time. If it proves successful— if it was seen that it was doing good to the Institution— surely they would not be the men to stand in the way of such an improvement. With reference to what had been fcaicl in regard to encroaching on the hours of public worship, he held it was wrong to base the opposition on the ground of competition, but at the same time he did not think it was a good thing that inducements should be offered to young people to absent themselves from" public worship. If the thing were rightly managed, it ought to be productive of nothing but good, and therefore the movement had his support.— (Applause.) The Rev. IX. L. Stamford then came forward and was received with loud and continued applause. He said he rose with great pleasure to second the resolution which had been so ably moved by Mr Gillies.—(Applause ) He had not come prepared to make along speech, nor did he come prepared to make what was strictly called a religious speech It was with much difficulty he confessed that he declined to take up the warlike challenge thrown down by the mover of the resolution. He was a humble member of the Church of England, and he had been challenged, as it were, to show how he, as a member of that Church, could act in opposition to the resolution. He would not trouble them with all his reasons, and he would content himself with tellmg them his conclusions. They were these : He believed that the Sunday, the day of rest, was a day of Divine obligation upon every human being. — (Hear, hear.) He believed that the Fourth Commandment and the Sabbath day therein ordained were abrogated for ever— (hear)— and he said that° the Sunday, this day of rest, which they were commanded to keep, was a day ■which they might lawfully arrange, manipulate, and alter as they please, provided always that in doing so they looked to provide for all their fellow creatures of whatever class they were.— (Loud and continued applause ) He seconded this amendment because he believed that there was a real crying need for such a place of recreation and renovation of nun's wearied faculties as the Athenaeum would provide on Sunday afternoons.— (Applause.) Men, he believed, were like the groat ocean-steamers which had to stop now and again in ordor to cool their bearings. He believed that no more useful tiling could bo done than to open the Athenaeum on Sunday afternoon. Before he closed, there was one thmg that ho wished to say. He •would earnestly deprecate tho spirit ■which had found utterance in this form : Men told him that if they opened the Athenaeum ou Sundays, they would lose many subscribers.— (No.) Such action as that would be like that of some very small boy in some very big school— (loud applause)— who said that he would not play at all if he did not get first innings.— (Loud and continued applause.) Mr J. G. S. Grant, who was greeted with cries of " time," said that he only wished >o address the meeting for a few minutes. He thought that the question should be raised from the quagmire into which it had fallen. Tho real issue had been lost sight of annd&t | a host of minor issues, lie was a member of the Athenaeum, and he claimed to be a religious man— iv a broad sense. — (Lourt laughter. ) He claimed also to have a knowledge of religious works with any mau or body of men in this Colony. He had no doubt that the mover of the resolution had the cause of religion and morality as much at heart as he had.— (Loud laughter. ) He would tell them what Lord Bacon had said. — (Disorder.) Viewing the question in all its bearings, the Christian Sabbath was insbitutod in celebration and in perpetual commemoration of th« seventh day, upon which the Lord rested

after he had made Heaven and Earth. Of course this was merely a figurative expression, for it was not to be supposed that the Almighty required rest. Bishop Norwich, in speaking of the Jews, had said that we should try to imitate them. The Jew regarded the Sabbath as a day of rest, and of consecration, and dedication of the soul to God. No one could say that the Christian Sabbath had been abrogated, and if he were asked why the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, he would say that it was done by Him who was pronounced Lord of the Sabbath. In this community we were much given to sensual, worldly, and material things, and he thought that they required one day in the seven to dedicate their souls to their Maker. — (Cries of "shut up," "sit down," and "give us less theology, and more common sense.") Theology was the height of common sense. He hoped they would regard this question on its broad issue. — (Cries of "time "' and "dry up." A number of persons here drowned the speaker's voice by stamping and hissing. A Voice : Put that hypocrite down.) It would take a strong man to put him down. It was an insult to the high God they all worshipped to go and sit down in an infidel Athenaeum on Sunday — (Shouts and hisses.)— A great many of those who were hissing had been prompted to ib. Would they allow him to read the Fourth Commandment ? — (Cries of "no," yelling, and stainpiug.)— If they gave him five minutes he would finish.— (More hissing and stamping. ) The Chairman said the meeting had better decide whether it would hear Mr Grant or not.— (Cries of "no," and "yes.") The Chairman then put it to the meeting whether it would hear Mr Grant, and the j " noes" appeared to be in a large majority. ' Mr Geant asked for five minutes more. — (Cries of •' turn him out," and " put that I nuisance down.") i The Ptev. Dr Stuart said that the meeting bad decided not to hear Mr Grant, and this ruling should be carried out. Personally he was sorry Mr Grant could not be heard. The Chairman said that he had told Mr Grant this, but he still persisted that he had a right to speak. He thought it would be much better if Mr Grant left the platform, and hoped that nothing unpleasant should have to be done. (Cries of " Shove him down.") Mr Stout moved that Mr Grant should be allowed three minutes. This was carried. Mr Grant went on to say, that to permit the opening of the Athenaeum was a work of irreligion. After some further remarks from Mr Grant, delivered amid great disorder, Mr Barton said that as a member of the Athenaeum, he had the right and the desire to speak on the question that was before them that night. The question was one of principle, and the principle was a most important one. He was not about to discuss the matter from a religious point of view ; he would leave that to the ministers, who might do so in the different places of worship, or at that meeting, if they liked. All he had to say, would be from a purely sectarian point of view. One gieat piinciple, he thought, was involved in this — were we to establish as a principle, that the seventh day of the week was no longer to be looked upon and considered as a day of absolute rest. Upon this point he would address them. If the motion was not the starting of this principle, then he did not | care if it was carried, if the gentlemen who wanted it carried could show that they had a good object. Mr Isaac had told them that instructing themselves in God and teaching themselves by good reading was a good object, and here he heartily agreed with him, and did not wish to prevent him doing them | good upon Sunday. When, however, _Mr | Cargill said that they were not to consider the feelings of those who happened to be opposed to him or the subject, he denied it. — (Mr CAKciiLL : I did not say so.) They had heard a good speech from Mr Gillies. He ; knew that that gentleman was a man of I strong religious feeling, aud he was snrprised to see him come forward as he had done. Then the Key. Mr Stanford had ooine forward to second the amendment, and this was sufficient to show that even from a religious point of view there did exist some difference of opinion. The Athenaeum was a private Institution they had got up amongst j themselves for the purpose of educating themselves, and in connection with the pi oposal that had been made to open the Institution on Sunday arose the question as to whether such a course would not tend to destroy the seventh day as a day of rest. — (Cries of "yes" and "no.") He thought yes, and he had certain reasons for thinking so, and he would request them to listen for , a moment to his reasons. They had been told at a former meeting that Mr Black, the librarian, would not be asked to work on the Sunday, but he would ask them whether, in the event of the Sunday resolution being carried, Mr Black would not at some future time have to bo there Sunday after Sunday. Let them assume that Mr Black had to work seven days in the week. — (Criosof "no.") If I the re.iding-rooni was opened for a sufficiently wood purpose, t''e comuruuiity would not obJeut to the interference with the seventh day's rest. Ff they would let him, he would show thorn how the community would go on from one thing to another.— ("No, no," and applause.) The best thing, then, would be to open all the other libraries, and the Museum.— (" Yes," and "no.") If the Athenaeum was opened, would any man say why the Museum should not be opened.— (A VorcK :So it ought.) There were a good j many good speakers here. To go on— why should we not have a series of Sunday lee-

! tures in the Athenaeum ? "We were told ! that the ordinary services in the churches 1 were not sufficient for the intelligence of some people, and we ought to get Sunday lectures from Mr Grant and Mr Cargill. — (Laughter, "and Mr Barton.") In Europe, bands played on Sunday, why should we not have bands here ? We had a Choral | Society, which might give concerts on Sunday, and then we should, no doubt, get on to | theatrical performances on Sunday. We j i should have the shops open perhaps.— (A Voice : "And the Supreme Court," laughter.) He did not profess to be a religious man, but for purely secular reasons, and for the general good of the community, he really thought we should n'.t encroach in any waj upon the Sabbath Day. Mr Stout, who was well received, said that ii what he had suggested at the last meeting had been done, the present meeting would never have been required. They would remember that he had suggested that a poll should be taken on the question they were then discussing. He must class him ■ self with that class of people for whose opinions Mr Cargill had said he would not show any respect at all. He hoped the meeting would remember this, in listening to the remarks he might have to make. He thought that every man's opinion ought to be shown respect to, to whatever sect he might belong. He had first to explain the origin of the motion to have the reading room of the Athenaeum opened on Sunday. He knew that some people in Duned n had opposed the opening of the Institute on Sunday, simply because he was the mover of the resolution. —(Cries of "No," and "Yes.") He had not the honour, however, to be the first person who had made this proposal. He had agreed with the suggestion, and had moved it because he was not in the habit of shirking an expression of opinion. — (Hear, hear.) He declined to enter into the religious question afc all. The real question was this — Was it lawful to do good on the Sabbathday ? If the religious question was brought up, be was quite prepared to discuss it. He had to regret that those members of the Athenaeum who had expressed such a fear in connection with this matter, about people having to work on Sunday, should have remained quiescent so long. What of the trains, the cabs, the public houses, hot dinners on Sundays, bellmen pulling church bells, Sunday-school libraries being open, and teachers in these schools distributing secular papers on the Sabbath ? Why had Mr Barton remained silent so long when all this was going on? — (Laughter.) Yet they were told that if the Athenaeum were opened in the manner proposed, untold I evils would fall upon them. Would the ■ reading of books cause the working man to be obliged to work on Sunday ? He did not wish to insult their understanding by putting such a question to them. — (Applause.) He hoped that workmen would soon i>ot only have one day to themselves, but a half-holi-day on Wednesday, and another on Saturday, and he would do all he could to pass a law that no man should be called upon to work for more than 45 hours a week, except where he made a special agreement with his employer to work more. When there was an attempt to make workmen work for seven days a week, then let the cry be raised ; but they should not raise this issue upon the question before them in connection with the Athenaeum. The Athenaeum could be opened in the manner proposed without any one having to work, and if it was found that this could not be done, the terms of Mr Gillies's motion provided that it should be closed again. The motion said that the Athenaeum should only be open so long as Mr Black was not called upon to do any work. He thought that this quite disposed of the objection that had been raised on this score. He would ask again, why had people been so quiescent up to this ? Some of the morning newspapers received advertisements on Sunday night, and in their offices work was generally commenced at seven o'clock on Sunday night, and yet people read their newspapers on the Monday morning without having their principles violated and their consciences stung by the fact of work having been done on Sunday.— (Applause.) If all the evils that had been referred to were coming, why had not Mr Barton and his friends gone to the Times and Guardian offices and told them that they must not carry on their trade on Sunday night, must not print on Sunday nitrht, or they would not read their Monday's issue, but go to the Star.— (Laughter.) They were told that they would shock the feelings of some people if they opened the Athenaeum. One lady and one gentleman had told them that those who supported the proposition had no conscience and no principle. If the consciences of those Avho opposed the proposition was of such a peculiar nature that it was not shocked at reading a paper on Monday morning that was printed upon Sunday night, they need not, he thought, pay much attention to them. — (Applause.) Were there not a number of members of the Athenaeum opposed to the proposition to open it on Sunday who went to Mr Black on Saturday night to borrow magazines to take home for Sunday reading, am? to be returned ou the Monday morning ? Would any one say that it was wrong to open the Institute to read books that they could read at home in their bed-rooms ?~ (Laughter, applause, and cries of "time.") His time was not yet up, but he did not intend to keep them much longer. He had listened to some Btrange Sunday lectures in the Octagon by a person who had now become a member of the Athenaeum.— (Mr J. G\ S. Grant here rose and caused some confusion.) In dealing with this matter, he would, in conclusion, ask them to discard the religious question, Was it wise to open an In«

stitute that would tend to elevate them all, or only to allow the advantages to a select few who would rush on Saturday night and grab all the magazines they could lay their hands on for Sunday reading ? — {Applause. ) Mr Shaw said he had but little to say, and as he was not in the habit of talking to large audiences, he would ask for their indulgence. In discussing the question before them, he looked upon it as one of expediency. He did not approve of the introduction of the religious discussion, for the matter was a social one. When he heard people talk about cooking dinners on Sunday and so on, he called it clap-trap analoey, for those things were necessary, while we had got on very well hitherto without having the Athenaeum opened. Since the last meeting he had looked about in order to form an opinion of his own with respect to the expediency of the proposal. Archbishop Whately bad said that every change was in itself an evil. — ("Oh, oh.") This was a great authority, and the same author said that those vfho proposed must hold themselves responsible for the consequences of that change, besides showing how it could be given effect to. He was told that the proposed change in connection with the Athenaeum would be a great convenience to a number of people, who would suffer hardship if they did not get it. He thought this a small matter, and they must not forget the ill-feeling that had been aroused. — ("No, no.") It was most unwise to take the course proposed. — (Cries of " Time," and stamping of feet.) Tne stamping continued for some time, and the Chairman called for order. Mr H. S. Pish, who was well received, said that if, as had been said, everything in the shape of change was bad, we should have been without many advantages we now enjoyed ; we should not have railways, electric telegraphs, and other things we possessed now, and which all enlightened people saw the benefit of. He did not hold strong opinions on the matter before the meeting, either upon the one side or the other, but he thought it the duty of everyone in matters of this kind, and esjjecially the duty of a man in a public position, to come forward and speak his mind upon such a subject. He had looked into this matter in as calm, fair, and unimpassioned manner, as it was possible for him to do, and he had come to the conclusion that a great deal of good would be done by the opening of the Athenaeum on Sunday, while on the other hand no harm would be done to any member of the community. Those who were in favour of opening the Institute for a few hours on Sunday, did not want to force anyone to go there ; they simply wanted the same freedom of choice that the other side had. The other side said "No, this course is wrong, and whether you like it or not, you shall not go, but will have to do as we tell you." This was intolerance and even bigotry, Mr Barton had drawn upon his lively imagination to a great extent, and had pictured to them evils that were dreadful to look upon, and which would be sure to arise if the present proposition were carried out. If anyone thought for a moment that any of the evils that had been thus put before them were to be realised, he was sure he would give his vote against the proposition t"at night. But he did not really believe that any of those evils would come to pass. They had been told that the Sabbath would be utterly destroyed so far as its sanctity was concerned, but he thought that, when there were any indications of such s. calamity it wovild then be time to take action to prevent it. If the effect of opening the Athenaeum on Sunday night was evil, all those present that night who voted for it would be prepared to vote against it at some future occasion. There was one thinghe would touch upon in this matter, because it had influenced him a great deal. He found, or he believed he had found the clergy desirousof interfering toomuchinsecular matters. — (Applause and disorder.) Every tradesmen should confine himself to the business to which he was brought up. — (Cries of " time," and great disorder, during which Mr Fish attempted to talk to the reporters. The meeting then became verj disorderly. A large number of persons at the back of the hall were stamping their feet in such a manner as to completely drown the speaker's voice. The Chairman tried to get order, but did not succeed for some time. Mr Pish, atter repeated efforts, at last managed to get heard. ) He said he wished to speak on behalf of a large class of the community who were compelled to live in hotels and boarding houses, who would be greatly benefited by the opening of the Athenaeum on Sunday. — (Disorder.) Dr Copland, whose appearance on the front of the platform to speak, was the signal for a long- continued uproar, remarked, on being able to get a hearing, that he wa3 exceedingly sorry at the interruptions offered to the last speaker, which he considered was most unfair, as the time allowed to each speaker had not been availed of to half its extent. To come to the point at issue. It had been stated by Mr Stout that this was not a religious question, and that view he (Dr Copland) regarded as a consistent view of the case from one who introduced himself to the meeting as belonging to the class referred to by Mr Cargill as not acknowledging the obligations and benefits of religion. — (Confusiori.) That view was quite in keeping with Mr Stout's position. Mr Stout : I deny that I ever said anything of the sort. Dr Copland here essayed to speak, but he was not allowed. The meeting would not hear him. Mr Carotll asked to be permitted to say in explanation that he did not think Mr Stout had placed him in a fair position by the remark he had made. What he (Mr Cargill) had said was that there waa a class in the

city a small number — who had no respect for religion, and were opposed to religion and Christianity. He said further that such personß had no respect for him— that he would not be guided by them, or have any respect for them. Mr Stout had amazed him, and, he must say, horrified him. Dr Copland was again about to speak when Mr Barton rose. Dr Copland took a seat on the reporters' table. Mr Barton stated he wanted to make an explanation, but the meeting would not listen to it. The explanation Mr Barton then made to the reporters was, so far as it could be heard, that»he had said he was not a religious man. Dr Copland resumed. He held that this was a religious question. He was not wandering away from the matter that had been already brought before them, that they had listened to ; and they would, he t.usted, listen to the other side of it. Matters j of religion had been brought before them by two of the speakers very pointedly, and on these he desired to speak. The Rev. Mr Stanford had given forth his conclusions on the religious aspect of the question, and with these he thoroughly disagreed. He totally dissented from the idea that the Decalogue or any one of the commandments were abrogated. Moreover, he (Dr Copland) defied him (Mr Stanford) to prove that the Sunday had no divine authority ; that it could be tampered with according to man's own notion, provided only some good could be done by doing so. He held that what should be done on the Sunday should be only what came within the category of works of necessity or mercy. The same point had been referred to by Mr Gillies. That gentleman had declared, to the astonishment of every other Presbyterian in the meeting-— (great laughter)— that there was nothing in the Presbyterian Standards opposed to the principle of the movement proposed to be inaugurated. He (Dr Copland) would simply point him to one of the Standards, in which he would find that in regard to the Fourth Commandment unnecessary work was prohibited on the Sabbath. In some of the arguments set forth there had, he would say, been a palpable confusion between certain things done on the Sabbath Day which were done on the authority of private individuals, and those things which were done in connection with public institutions. In this, which was a public matter, he held that he was implicated if he gave sanction to the Athenaeum being open on Sunday, while he was not implicated in the Sabbath-breaking of individuals on their own authority. Therefore on principle he objected, and rightly too, as far as his rights and privileges were concerned, to being a party either to the opening of the Athenaeum on Sunday or to the unnecessary employing of labour to which it would certainly lead. The change would be greatly the wors>e for the community, as had been shown so clearly and unanswerably by Mr Barton.— (A Voice : Bunkum.) It was said that his side claimed a great deal of forbearance from the other side. What was the actual state of the case 1 They simply stood out for their own civil liberty—(laughter)—and to have the Sunday free from secular labour. It was the other side that | claimed forbearance. That side was like the fox pourtrayed in the fable, that lost its tail, and wanted the other foxes to dispense with theirs, which, it set up, were useless appendages. Now they (his side) held that the Sabbath was not a useless appendage. He did trust the question would be looked at not as it affected the mere matter of opening the Athenaeum on a Sunday, but in the broader view in which it was presented in the question of religious principle, and also on the ground of the social exigencies and interests that had been so ably and unanswerably presented by Mr Barton. At this stage there were loud cries of vote. Mr Rennie rose to speak. The meeting would not hear Mr Rennie. Mr R. H. LEABy came forward. The meeting would not hear Mr Leary. The Chairman asked if it waa the wish of the meeting that a vote be now taken, and, in reply a shout of "yes" went through the building. The Rev. Dr Stuart then came forwarward and the meeting decided to hear him. He meant to vote for the motion, and wished to be allowed to make a few remarks to put himself right with his fellow citizens. He regarded their good opinions, and would do nothing, if he could help it, to lose their esteem. The advocates of the opening were doing an injustice when they said "We want light-more light— and you will not let us have it. " He would say, for him self, tbathislife, from the time he had been fourteen years old, was in opposition to that statement. He had dedicated his life to the people, and had done his best as tutor, minister, and citizen, to enlighten them. Since hs had come to Dunedin he had been among their foremost citizens advocating schools, grammar schools, and universities. To say that they were capable of doing anything in the way of opposing the progress of enlightenment was to do them a horrible in•iurv They were twitted with giving out books in their Sunday School Libraries on Sunday, but it should be understood these books formed part of the mBtruction; that they were meant for extending the Sunday-school, as it were, into the entire week. He then quoted the example of Raikes, the founder of Sundayachools, who taught neglected children m his time the- ABC ; and said that were it neeesaary, he (Dr Stuart) would, at the Sundayschool, teach them the alphabet and the spelling-book. The clergy were devoting themßcW heart and souffco well-doing, and cue who had beem the Mayor of thiß city

fering too much in politics. Was he (the I Rev. Dr Stuart) not a citizen ? Did he not pay taxes '1 He had a right to a vote, had that vote, and ever since he had it he used it, and never concealed whom he voted for. He was a minister, and had his duties a& such. He was a citizen, and would not allow himself to be deprived of his rights as a citizen. — (Great applause.) He then quoted the working of the Forbes Mackenzie Act in England, and said that if the Athenaeum were opened on Sunday people would not, eventually, he content with having that alone opened, but must have the public houses opened — the opening of the Athenaeum would not be enough — Air Stou: had come forward to say, as a religious man Mr Stout : I did not say so. Dr Stuakt did not question Mr Stout's humanitarian feelings. He knew Mr Stout, and knew what he had done. He knew what he was looking forward to— (laughter) — but Mr Stout was not the only benevolent citizen of Dunedin. No man respected Mr Stout more than he did, but when he came forward as an advocate for the change A Voice : Why don't you give it a trial ? Dr Stuakt : No. Christian principle prevents me from trying it. He would not leave the Athenaeum ; he anticipated being on the winning side. He trusted that they, as the Superintendent had put it, would leave well alone ; there was not sufficient unanimity of feeling for making the change. For his part, if it was to be opened, he would say open it from nine in the morning till ten at night. He hoped that in the fervour of the moment he had not done injustice to any one whom he opposed. i Mr Oaikjill waivsd his right to reply. | Mr LowutY proposed that the voting be taken by ballot. Mr J. P. Millab moved that the vote be taken by a division— Ayes to the right, and Noes to the left. The show of hands was in favour of the voting being taken by a division. Mr J. I*. Millar and Mr Stout were appointed tellers for the Noes, and Messrs Stuart and Webb for the Ayes. After the counting had been going on for some little time, Mr Stout came forward to the front of the room, and, addressing the Chairman, said he wished to know if it was the duty of a teller, if a member was on one side of the room to ask him to go to the other. Great noise here ensued, and MiMillar, who followed Mr Stout up the room, made an explanation, part of which could not be heard, and that part which was heard could not be understood. The Chairman, after the tellers' lists had been duly signed and handed to him, announced the ""result of the voting to be as follows : — For Mr Gillies's amendment, 252 ; against, 242. He declared Mr Gillies's amendment to be carried. The announcement was received with great cheering and other deI monstrations from the right. Mr Barton rose to a point of order. There was but the small majority of ten, ! while he submitted there should be a majority of two-thirds.— (Hissing and groans from the right. ) Mr Stout moved a vote of thanks to the Chairman. Dr Stuart would move an amendment. They had no right to declare the ineoting over. The Chairman said he had not declared the meeting over. j Mr Gillies thought that the members could leave the question with confidence in the hands of the Committee. Mr Ramsay then moved — " That a poll be taken to ascertain the opinion of all the members of the above Institution as to whether the same shall be open on Sundays, and that until the result of such poll be ascertained, the Institution be not so opened." The reading of the resolution elicited cries | of " you have been beaten twice already." The Rev. Dr. Stuart would be extremely gratified if those who voted with him were to leave the matter in the hands of the Committee. He would say have confidence in the Committee, and he thought that nothing would be done to violate fe lings. Mr Stout agreed with Dr Stuart. Mr Ramsay withdrew his motion. The vote of thanks to the chair was carried, and the meeting separated at about live minutes to 11.