a word in
reference to the building. It stands on the northern side of Meadow-
street, between sundry cottage houses, retiring a little from the
general frontage, and by its architecture seems to be a cross
between a small school and a minute country meeting-house. It was
originally built in 1844 by Mr. John Todd of this town. He started
it as a chapel on his own account--for at that time he had special
theological notions; and probably considered that he had as much
right to have a place of worship as anybody else. We have been
unable to ascertain the primal denominational character of the
building; the founder of it is unable to tell us; all that we have
been able to get out of him is, that the place "had no name," and
all that we can, therefore, fairly say is, that he built it, and did
either something or nothing in it. Mr. Todd did not occupy it very
long; he struck his colours in about a year; and afterwards it was
used by different Dissenting bodies, including some Scotch Baptists,
on whose behalf the building was altered. Originally it was only one
story high; but when the Baptists went to it a second story was
added, and, having either aspiring notions or considering that they
would be better accommodated in the higher than the lower portion of
the building, they went aloft, leaving the ground floor for
individuals of more earthly proclivities. Two years ago Mr. Todd
sold the building, and about six months since certain Christian
Brethren hired the top room for "first day" purposes, week day work
being carried on in it by an industrious schoolmaster.

Like the Quakers, Christian Brethren are a "peculiar people." They
believe more in being good and doing good than in professing
goodness formally. They recognise some forms and a few ceremonies;
but vital inherent excellence--simple Christianity, plain,
unadorned, and earnest--is their pole-star. They claim to be guided
in all their religious acts solely by the Scriptures; consider that
as "the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch," their
followers have no right to assume any other name; think, baptismally
speaking, that whilst there may be some virtue in sprinkling and
pouring, there can be no mistake about absolute immersion, inasmuch
as that will include everything; think baby baptism unnecessary, and
hold that none except penitent believers, with brains fairly
solidified, should be admitted to the ordinance; maintain that, as
under the apostolic