of itself an example of the change we speak of.  I am afraid that when Walter Scott described Monkbarns as being with difficulty “hounded out” to hear the sermons of good Mr. Blattergowl, he wrote from a knowledge of the habits of church-going then generally prevalent among Scottish lairds.  The late Bishop Sandford told me that when he first came to Edinburgh—­I suppose fifty years ago—­few gentlemen attended church—­very few indeed were seen at the communion—­so much so that it was a matter of conversation when a male communicant, not an aged man, was observed at the table for the first time.  Sydney Smith, when preaching in Edinburgh some forty years ago, seeing how almost exclusively congregations were made up of ladies, took for his text the verse from the Psalms, “Oh that men would therefore praise the Lord!” and with that touch of the facetious which marked everything he did, laid the emphasis on the word “men.”  Looking round the congregation and saying, “Oh that men would therefore praise the Lord!” implying that he used the word, not to describe the human species generally, but the male individuals as distinguished from the female portion.  In regard to attendance by young men, both at church and communion, a marked change has taken place in my own experience.  In fact, there is an attention excited towards church subjects, which, thirty years ago, would have been hardly credited.  Nor is it only in connection with churches and church services that these changes have been brought forth, but an interest has been raised on the subject from Bible societies, missionary associations at home and abroad, schools and reformatory institutions, most of which, as regard active operation, have grown up during fifty years.

Nor should I omit to mention, what I trust may be considered as a change belonging to religious feeling—­viz., that conversation is now conducted without that accompaniment of those absurd and unmeaning oaths which were once considered an essential embellishment of polite discourse.  I distinctly recollect an elderly gentleman, when describing the opinion of a refined and polished female upon a particular point, putting into her mouth an unmistakable round oath as the natural language in which people’s sentiments and opinions would be ordinarily conveyed.  This is a change wrought in men’s feelings, which all must hail with great pleasure.  Putting out of sight for a moment the sin of such a practice, and the bad influence it must have had upon all emotions of reverence for the name and attributes of the Divine Being, and the natural effect of profane swearing, to “harden a’ within,” we might marvel at the utter folly and incongruity of making swearing accompany every expression of anger or surprise, or of using oaths as mere expletives in common discourse.  A quaint anecdote, descriptive of such senseless ebullition, I have from a friend who mentioned the names of parties concerned:—­A late Duke of Athole had invited