churches as there were Unitarian, and sixtyseven more Orthodox churches than the whole number of Congregational churches before the separation began; while the Orthodox church members were to the Unitarians as ten to one.*

In 1857 the Orthodox Congregational churches in Massachusetts numbered four hundred and ninety, the Unitarians one hundred and seventy. In 1870 Orthodox Congregational churches had increased to five hundred and two, their ministers to five hundred and ninety-one, and their communicants to above eighty thousand. From these data there was but little variation up to the returns in 1874, when the whole number of churches was but six larger than it was four years previous, and the number of communicants was less than twenty-five hundred more - 82,479.

The present number of Unitarian parishes in

* Clark, 272.

The following statement was made several years ago by an old-fashioned "liberal" minister, usually reckoned among Unitarians, though against his protest. In May, 1812, there were, he tells us, three hundred and thirty-five settled Congregational ministers in Massachusetts. Of these, one hundred and seventynine were reputed Orthodox, and one hundred and thirty-eight were liberal enough to be called Arminians. In May, 1846, there were one hundred and twenty-four liberal enough to be Arminians (to give them no other party name), and four hundred and seventeen denominated themselves Orthodox; making five hundred and forty-one in all. This makes a liberal loss of fourteen in thirty-four years, and an Orthodox gain of two hundred and thirty-four.- Dr. John Pierce, of Brookline, Massachusetts, in Memoir of Dr. Samuel Worcester, vol. 11, p. 379, note t.

CHAP. XVII.]

NOTES IN CONCLUSION.

693

Massachusetts is not far from one hundred and ninety, of which thirty-one are in Boston; and the whole number in the United States is about three hundred and fifty-eight. The whole number of Unitarian ministers in America, in 1875, was about four hundred-394; one hundred and fiftynine of whom were without parochial charges, many of them having other occupations.*

NOTE. The literature of the Unitarian controversy is copious almost beyond example, considering the fact that it was essentially a local controversy, confined very much to New England, and mainly to Massachusetts. The marginal references to authorities, on the preceding pages, sufficiently indicate, perhaps, the sources from which this sketch has been derived. And yet, there are a few comprehensive works which deserve special mention. At the head of these should be placed Dr. Gillett's exhaustive review of the Unitarian Controversy, in the April number of the Historical Magazine for 1871, pp. 221-324; in which may be found a list of two hundred and sixty-five distinct works and papers on this controversy. And even this list does not include scores of articles on the subject, many of them very long and labored articles, which appeared from time to time in the Panoplist, Anthology, Christian Disciple, Christian Examiner, Spirit of the Pilgrims, and Christian Spectator.

Another comprehensive work of very great value is entitled Pages from the Ecclesiastical History of New England, between 1740 and 1840, by the late Bishop Burgess, of Maine. This is a remarkably fair and comprehensive review of this entire controversy for a hundred years, by a scholar and divine who did not entirely sympathize with the leaders on either side. 12mo, 126 pages.

The fairest and most satisfactory presentation of the Unita

*I get at these figures by counting the lists of parishes and ministers in the Year-Book of the Unitarian Congregational Churches for 1875. No statistics are published of Unitarian church members or parishes, so far as I can learn.

rian side of this controversy will be found in Dr. George E. Ellis' Half-Century of the Unitarian Controversy. 8vo, 511 pages.

[Mr. Punchard's original plan contemplated the addition of a sixth volume to this history, for which he had collected much of the requisite material. That volume would have embraced the following topics: Synods and Councils, Congregational Psalmody, English Congregationalism from 1625, and The Inner Life of British Congregationalism. But a very short time before his death, Mr. Punchard expressed to the subscriber his conviction that the preparation for this sixth volume was too incomplete to warrant any provision for its publication. Accordingly, I can only accept the alternative presented by the sudden breaking off of the purposes of the author, and announce the completion of his History. Should any of the material mentioned above ever be given to the public, it must be in some other form than was originally contemplated. Had the author lived to add another volume, the criticism which was sometimes passed upon the first three volumes-that the title, History of Congregationalism, was inappropriate - would have lost much of its pertinence; for no candid reader could have failed to admit the incompleteness of the history as a whole without the preparatory work which those volumes included; or, in other words, it must have been freely conceded that the history of Congregationalism, as a complete organism and as a working system, absolutely demanded the prior history of its germinal life, and of the protracted and weary conflicts by which the system was developed.-G. B. J.]