^JB "^m i%x m^^^.s^ THE LONDON CHURCHES AND FOREIGN MISSIONS. BY EUGENE STOCK, Editorial Secretary of the Church Missionary Society. Reprinted, by permission, from " The Clergyman' s M^guzine^ January, i88j. Hazell, Watson, and Viney, Printers, London and Aylesbury. THE LONDON CHURCHES AND FOREIGN MISSIONS. It has often occurred to me that an interesting addition might be made to the multifarious information suppHed by that useful publication, Mackeson's *' Guide to the Churches of London," if against each church were recorded the amount contributed during the year, by offertories and in other ways, to various Christian and charitable enterprises, or at all events to Foreign Missions. If even nothing else were entered than the letters " S.P.G. " or " C.M.S. " to indicate which society is sup- ported, that alone would be a distinct addition to the interest of the Guide. The question would be no more invidious or inquisitorial than the question what hymnbook is in use, or whether the choir is a paid one ; and I would fain hope that there are some at least who regard the subject as of possibly equal importance with that of floral decorations or Gregorian tones. In the meanwhile, I have made for myself an analysis of the contributions given to Foreign Missions, by 835 churches in London and its suburbs, so far as Foreign Missions are repre- sented by the two great institutions, the Society for the Pro- pagation of the Gospel and the Church Missionary Society, in the year 1 88 1 ;* and I propose in this article to submit some of the results of this analysis. I refrain from giving a list of all the churches, with their several contributions to either or both of these two societies. In the first place, the space at my disposal would not admit of this ; and in the second place^ a comparison based on one year's returns would be in many cases unfair. Local and temporary causes may make the * The S.P.G. year was iSSi ; the C.M.S. year from April, 1881, to March, 1882. 4 The Lo7idon Churches and Foreign Missions, amount raised in a particular parish in any one year excei> tionally high or exceptionally low ; and to arrive at something like a fair comparison, an average in each case of three years' returns should be taken. But my object is not to exhibit the deficiencies of particular churches ; it is only to show general results. I therefore adopt the classification of parishes by rural deaneries, as one actually existing, and both convenient and familiar ; and while it might be invidious to print St. Peter's, which gives £\o to Missions, next to St. John's, which gives ;^ioo, there is no invidiousness in giving the totals from the different deaneries. And for this, one year's returns are suffi- cient guide, because the chances are that if in any deanery certain churches are exceptionally high in the year taken as a specimen, in that same year other churches will be excep- tionally low, and thus the general result obtained is near enough for practical purposes. I proceed in the first place to enumerate certain general features of the analysis which must be carefully noted by the reader. 1. The selection of a boundary of the suburbs of London is of necessity arbitrary. I have not taken any hard and fast line such as that of ten or twelve miles' radius from Charing Cross, but rather, in including or excluding a particular deanery, decided each case upon its own merits, to the best of my judgment. Probably there would be reasonable grounds oi complaint against any conceivable selection. In the Diocese of London, all the deaneries are included except Hampton, Uxbridge, and part of Harrow. In this latter case, the district of Willesden is allowed a place. In the Diocese of St. Albans, the one deanery of Barking is included. In the Diocese of Rochester, the whole Archdeaconry of Southwark is included ; also, in the Archdeaconry of Rochester, the deaneries of Dept- ford, Greenwich, and Woolwich ; and in the Archdeaconry of Kingston, the deaneries of Barnes, Kingston, and Streatham. In the Diocese of Canterbury, the deanery of Croydon is in^ eluded, and a portion of the deanery of West Dartford, viz., Bcddington. 2. In counting the " churches," the Diocesan Calendars have been followed in almost every instance. Some few " churches " are mission chapels, or chapels of large institutions ; but if - UIUC . \- / The London Churches and Forelon Missions t, enumerated in the Diocesan Calendars, they have been included. Where there is more than one church in an ecclesiastical dis- trict^ each church is counted separately. To this, however, the City is an exception. There, each union of parishes is counted as one parish. 3. The classification by deaneries, though convenient on the whole, has its drawbacks. Thus, Kilburn is a well-known and well-understood district ; but of its six churches, three are in the deanery of Harrow, two in that of Paddington, and one in that of Highgate. Moreover, the C.M.S. system of local Associations does not at all follow ruri-decanal lines. Par- ticular districts, availing themselves of the perfectly voluntary character of that system, have organized themselves for C.M.S. purposes in their own way. Thus, to take the case just mentioned, there is a " Kilburn . Association," which includes churches in two deaneries, while one Kilburn church in a third deanery belongs to the " St. John's Wood Association." This has caused trouble in filling up the column of C.M.S. contribu- tions. The S.P.G. accounts, on the other hand, follow the official lists, church by church, the voluntary association system not being in force ; and their form, whatever its merits or its defects in other respects, is certainly simpler for comparison. 4. I do not pretend that my calculations are exhaustive of the subject. Possibly some few churches — not many, I think — which ^lY^ to neither S.P.G. nor C.M.S., may give to other smaller missionary societies or to independent missions. Certainly many churches which support S.P.G. or C.M.S., or both, do support other societies and missions also, such as the South American Missionary Society, the Zenana and Female Education Societies, the Universities' Mission to Central Africa, and particular colonial or missionary dioceses. But it is not possible without direct inquiry, or a careful collation of numerous reports, to know of these collections and contributions. Rather than attempt to be exhaustive, and succeed only in being partial, I have thought it best to confine this paper entirely to the two great leading Societies.* And even as regards them the figures are necessarily incomplete ; for it is not possible to include * It must be remembered, however, that a considerable proportion of the contribu- tions to particular dioceses, and to certain separate missions, are paid into the S.P.G Special Fund account, and therefore actually are included in my figures, as explained in the next paragraph. 6 The Lo7ido7i Churches and Foreign Missions, such subscriptions and donations as are paid direct to the head offices. In the year under review, S.P.G. received ;^4,548 for its General Fund from residents in London, which is entered in its " office Hst," and cannot be credited to particular parishes. C.M.S. does not say how much it got from London ; but from the whole country it received direct ;^3,68o in subscriptions, and ;^2 0,95 8 in donations. The greater part of the former, and a considerable portion of the latter, came from the London district ; but here, again, no part of either can be taken into account in this article, because the items cannot be allotted to particular parishes ; indeed, many of the donations are anony- mous. There is, however, one exception. The "Foreign Mission Fund" of St. Peter's, Eaton Square, gives to C.M.S. ;^500 a year for the Krishnagar Mission. This is of the nature of an " Appropriated Fund " in S.P.G. parlance. In C.M.S. accounts, it appears under the "Benefactions" {i.e. donations) paid direct to the Society ; but being a regular contribution from a par- ticular parish, it seems right to include it in the analysis. 5. It should be observed that any comparison between S.P.G. and C.MS., based upon the figures I am about to present, is greatly to the disadvantage of C.M.S., because Special Funds in connection with CM S. cannot be included. Thus, many churches, during the year under review, gave col- lections to the funds raised personally (for what is virtually C.M.S. work) by Bishop Horden, of Moosonee, and Bishop Burdon, of Hong-Kong ; and numerous contributions are con- tinually being sent to individual C.M.S. missions and mission- aries in all parts of the world. But none of these appear in the Society's accounts, although the Society provides the facilities necessary for remitting them abroad. The funds acknowledged in the Report are those only which are in some sense under the control of the Committee. On the other hand, more than a third of S.P.G. income consists of con- tributions to similar Special Funds, to which the Society acts in the capacity of bankers ; and these being included in the Reports, I have included in the analysis, but entered in a separate column. Another section of S.P.G. income is "Ap- propriated Funds," which are in aid of objects specifically named by the donors, but, subject to that limitation, are under the control of the Society. The C.M.S. " Special Funds," The London Churches and Foreign Musions, 7 officially so called, are virtually of the same kind. But as the contributions to these latter are not included in the accounts of the C.M.S. Local Associations, they also cannot be included in the analysis ; and therefore, to be as fair as possible, I have put the S.P.G. " Appropriated Funds " in the " Special " and not the " General " column. I ought to add here that the S.P.G. has recently determined to receive for the future no contributions to " Special Funds " of the kind above described ; but only to the General Fund and to " Ap- propriated Funds." These latter are, however, to be called henceforth " Special Funds ;" so that after the present year the systems of the two Societies will run nearly parallel, and a comparison of their receipts will be much easier. 6. Once more, it might be urged that as a large portion of S.P.G. income is spent, in accordance with the Society's charter, in providing ministrations for the white population in the British Colonies, the funds of the Colonial and Continental Church Society ought also to be taken into account, since that institution is, in respect of such work, more akin to S.P.G. than one like C.M.S., which is a missionary society pure and simple. If a comparison of the incomes of various societies, in the interest of one or more of them, were the object of the present article, this point would have some weight. But such is not my object at all. My real purpose is to show what London gives to " Foreign Missions," the question which society is supported being a secondary, though no doubt an interesting one. Now it is quite certain that gifts to S.P.G. or C.M.S. are avowedly meant to be gifts to " Foreign Mis- sions," and therefore it is these that must be reckoned, even though strict logic might suggest a somewhat different cal- culation. If any of the supporters of either society are stirred up, by the figures I am about to present, to more active effort for the cause to which their adhesion is given, the desire of my heart will be abundantly fulfilled. Beginning with the Diocese of London, and adopting the order of the London Diocese Book, we take first the deanery of FULHAM, comprising Fulham, Hammersmith, and West Kensington. Of fifteen churches, four supported* C.M.S., five * I use the past tense throughout, to emphasize the fact that the figures are for one year only, i88i. Some parishes have no doubt done more, and some less, in 1882. No. of Chs. Churches Supporting j| Amount contributed. RURAL DEANERY. C M.S. anrt S.P.G. C.M.S. only. S.P.G. only. Nei- ther. C.M.S. S P.O. Genera! I'uua. S.P.G. Special Funds. ToUl Diocese cv London. {^Archdeaconry of Middlesex.) £ L L L Fulham i.S 4 .5 6 207 104 31 342 Kensington .... 31 7 2 15 7 980 757 230 1.977 Bloomsbury .... 8 2 I 5 239 no 49 398 Chelsea 1.5 I 8 3 3 402 14 7 423 Ealing 28 7 8 9 4 405 227 29 662 Enfield 2S 4 6 II 4 582 208 61 851 St. George's, Hanover Square 23 4 12 7 661 816 2,125 3,602 Harrow (part) 7 I 2 3 I 243 34 277 Highgate . . . . 23 6 7 10 1,818 487 121 2,426 St. Martin-in-the-Fields . 1.5 I 6 8 10 80 13 103 St. Marylebone 26 6 6 6 8 1.445 459 no 2,014 Paddington . . . . 21 8 7 3 3 1.873 343 234 2,450 St. Pancras .... 33 5 4 8 16 239 189 44 472 St. James', Westminster 6 I 3 2 24 54 78 St. Margaret's and St. John's, Westminster 13 3 3 4 3 254 109 I 364 {Archdeaconry of London.) East City .... 25 I 2 6 16 89 5^ II 156 West City 42 II 10 21 210 139 50 408 Hackney 25 2 3 12 8 220 297 88 605 Ishngton. 3« 5 30 I 2 2,551 5b 6 2,613 St. Sepulchre . 23 3 8 T2 71 58 12 141 Shoreditch 21 2 6 13 14 91 7 112 Stepney . 43 I ID 8 24 239 50 6 2QS Spitalfields 25 531 2 64 6 4 13 150 22 172 128 153 186 12,936 4,770 3,235 20,941 Diocese of St. Albans. Barking 40 17 8 15 572 109 23 704 Diocese of Rochester, {Archdeaconry of Rochester.) Deptford 8 2 4 2 121 19 I 141 Greenwich . . . . 27 5 6 15 I 968 395 21 1,384 Woolwich . . . . 25 2 9 8 6 733 90 823 {Archdeacojiry of Sojdhwark.) Battersea . . . . 15 8 2 5 116 82 19 217 Camberwell . . . . 29 3 8 II 7 907 196 17 1,120 Clapham 18 I 9 3 5 1,210 102 40 1-352 Kennmgton . . . . II I 3 3 4 293 72 17 382 Lambeth . . . . 10 7 2 I IIS 22 4 141 Newington . . . . 13 I 5 4 23 41 53 117 Southwark . . . . 29 3 II 7 8 303 64 2 369 ( A rch deacon ry of Kingston . ) Barnes 15 6 I 8 414 305 44 763 Kingston . . . . 19 4 10 4 I 1,122 360 154 1,636 Streatham . . . . 19 2 7 5 S 594 200 13 385 807 238 36 76 77 49 6,919 1.948 9-252 Diocese of Canterbury. ~ Croydon 18 3 5 9 I 861 210 117 i,i8€ West Dartford (part) 8 3 3 I 10 4 5 178 123 18 135 319 26 8 1.039 333 1.507 Grand Total . . . . 835 103 229 248 25s 21,466 7,160 3,778 32,404 N.B.—'Y:\\& S.P.G. totals do not in every case exactly agree with the corresponding totals in the summaries of the S.P.G. Report. They have, however, been carefully compared, and each variation can he accounted for. With regard to slight discrepancies in the numbers of churches, it must be borne in mind tbat in every deanery there are one or more doubtful cases which would quite naturally be taken differently by different compilers. The London Churches and Foreign Missions, 9 S.P.G., and six neither; that is to say, two-fifths, apparently did nothing for Missions. C.M.S. received ;^207, and S.P.G. ;^i3 5 Of the former sum, six-sevenths came from St. John's, Fulham (Rev. W. E. Batty), and St. Mary's, West Kensington (Rev. J. Macnaught, formerly Rev. J. F. Serjeant). Of the latter sum, more than half came from one church, St. John's, Hammersmith (Rev. W. A. Whit worth). In the adjoining deanery of KENSINGTON, which includes Notting Hill, South Kensington, West Brompton, and Earl's Court, as well as Kensington proper, there are thirty-one churches; two C.M.S., fifteen S.P.G., seven both, seven neither. Here it is noticeable that nine churches gave C.M.S. almost the same amount as twenty-two gave S.P.G. ; viz., ^^980 compared with ^997. Of the former sum, no less than £62 i " came from St. Paul's, Onslow Square (Rev. H. W. Webb-Peploe), and ^249 from four associated churches in Kensington, the parish church (Hon. and Rev. E. C. Glyn), its two daughter churches, and St. Barnabas. If the contributions of these same four to S.P.G., £a^66, be added, it will be seen that just two-thirds of the whole amount given to Missions by thirty-one churches came from five of them. The only other churches giving over ;^ioo each were St. John's Notting Hill (Rev. Dr. Thornton), £\a^6 {£j^ S.P.G., £ji C.M.S.), and St. Stephen's, South Kensington (Rev J. P. Waldo), i;i t8 for S.P.G. In the small deanery of Bloomsbury, five out of the eight churches did nothing for either Society. St. George's and Christ Church supported both, and St. Giles's C.M.S. only. Total, C.M.S. ;^2 39, S.P.G. ^159; of which sums St. George's (Rev. F. F. Goe) gave i^202 and £6g. Chelsea is mainly a C.M.S. district, ^^402 being cpntributed to that Society, against £21 to S.P.G. One church supported both, eight C.M.S. only, three S.P.G. only, and three neither. Nearly two-thirds of the larger sum came from two churches out of the fifteen, viz.. Trinity (Rev. F. Cox), ^^142, and Park Chapel (Rev. J. Bennett), ^i 14. In Ealing deanery, which includes Acton, Chiswick, Han well, Heston, Hounslow, Isleworth, Turnham Green, etc., twenty-four out of twenty-eight churches did something, though none did \^\y largely, no one exceeding ^100. There were eight C.M.S,, * See footnote on next page. lo The London Churches and Foreign ]l fissions. nine S.P.G., seven both. Total, C.M.S. £406, S.P.G. £2^6. St. Mary's, Acton (Rev. C. M. Harvey), gave C.M.S. ^63, and S.RG. ;^34. In Enfield, again (comprising also Edmonton, Tottenham, Barnet, etc.), twenty-one churches out of twenty-five did some- thing ; four for both Societies, six for C.M.S., eleven for S.P.G. Total, C.M.S. i^5 82, of which ;^3 5 3 came from one church, Christ Church, Southgate; total, S.P.G. ^269. Thus, one church out of twenty- five gave more than two-fifths of the whole. Of the twenty-three churches in the important and wealthy deanery of St. George's, Hanover Square, which includes May- fair, Belgravia, and Pimlico, twelve supported S.P.G., only four C.M.S., and seven neither. The figures are most remarkable and significant. The C.M.S. total was only £661, while that of S.P.G. was ^2,94 1 ; and of these two sums i^5oo and ;^2,363 respectively came from St. Peter's, Eaton Square (Rev. G. H. Wilkinson) ;* that is to say, four-fifths of the whole amount con- tributed for Foreign Missions by the wealthiest quarter of London came from one parish. It may further be observed that, of the St. Peter's contributions, ^1,669 of the amount paid to S.P.G., and the ;^5oo to C.M.S., were for special objects, as also was ^156 from other churches; so that we have a nett sum of ^^977, as given by twenty-three churches (or, excluding St. Peter's con- tribution under this head, ;^5 8 3 by twenty-two churches), in the very heart of the world's wealth, to the unfettered administra- tion of the two great Societies. The only other churches in this deanery giving over ;^ioo each were St. George's, Hanover Square, ^^148, and St. Gabriel's with All Saints, Pimlico, £16"/) in both cases for S.P.G, The greater part of the deanery of HARROW is not included in our table ; only seven churches in Willesden and Kilburn. There are two C.M.S., three S.P.G., one both, and one neither. * It is right to say that the very large amount from St. Peter's, Eaton Square, which is referred to several times in this article, was somewhat exceptional. In the previous year, 1880, it gave £2,^6 to S.P.G. General Fund, and ^1,470 to S.P.G. Special Funds, more than ;^5oo less than in 1881. On the other hand, St, Paul's. Onslow Square (Kensington deanery), had an exceptionally large year in 1S80, when it gave £$2>7 extra to C.M.S. for a special purpose. These two cases illustrate the importance of not building too much on the individual cases mentioned in this article, and at the same time the way in which excess in one case may balance deficiency in another, and teo leave the total a fair avcrai^e. The London Churches ajid Foreion Missions, 1 1 ^> Total, S.P.G. i^34; C.M.S, ;^243, of which £210 is from Holy Trinity, Kilburn. Here three-fourths of the entire missionary contribution of seven churches came from one of them. HiGHGATE deanery is extensive and important, comprising also Hampstead, Hornsey, and Finchley, and a corner of Kil- burn. Every one of the twenty-three churches did something, ten supporting S.P.G., seven CM.S., six both. Total, C.M.S, ;^i,8i8, S.P.G. £60^. Of the former sum, ;^i,i56 was from the Hampstead C.M.S. Association, including four churches, two of which, Christ Church (Rev. E. H. Bickersteth), and St. John's (Rev. G. S. Karney, formerly Rev. H. Wright), gave almost the whole amount. There was also ^179 from St Mary's, Kilburn (Rev. C V. Childe), and ^163 from Trinity, South Hampstead (Rev. H. Sharpe). Of the S.P.G. total, £206 came from St. Peter's, Belsize Park (Rev. F. W. Tremlett). St. Michael's, Highgate, raised ^138; viz., ^81 for S.P.G., and ;^5 7 for CMS. The deanery of St. Martin's-IN-THE-Fields is mainly a poor one, comprising fifteen churches in the Strand and Sqhq districts. Eight did nothing, six sent £g2) to S.P.G., and one sent £10 to C.M.S. St. Marylebone, on the other hand, is another large and wealthy deanery, with twenty- six churches, of which six sup- ported both Societies, six C.M.S. only, six S.P.G. only, and eight neither. Total C.M.S. ^^1,445, S.P.G. ;^569. Of the purely C.M.S. churches, All Souls (Rev. Sholto Douglas) sent ;^363, Portman Chapel (Rev. N. Sherbrooke) ;^3 57, Emmanuel, Maida Hill (Rev. J. G. Tanner), £i^g, Brunswick Chapel (Rev. E, W. Moore) ,^153. Of the churches supporting both societies Trinity (Rev. W. Cadman) raised ;^I97 (C.M.S. ;^I33, S.P.G, £64) ; St. Mary's, Bryanston Square (Hon. and Rev. W. H, Fremantle), £271 (C.M.S. £^0, S.P.G. ^221); St. Mark's, Hamilton Terrace (Canon Duckworth), ^163 (C.M.S. ;^ii4, S.P.G. ;^49). Of purely ST.G. churches, All Saints, Margaret Street (Rev. Berdmore Compton), stands first with £^2. The deanery of Paddington stands third of all the deaneries of London in its missionary contributions, but they are raised much more evenly from various churches than in St. George's, Hanover Square, which stands first, though not quite equal in this respect to Islington, which stands second. Of twenty-one churches in Paddington, eighteen contributed, eight of them 1 2 The Londoji Churches and Forcicu Missions. t> over £ioo each. There were seven for C.M.S. only, three S.P.G. only, eight both. Total, C.M.S. ^^"1,873, S.P.G. £^77. Christ Church, Lancaster Gate (Rev. W. Boyd Carpenter), headed the list with ^550 (C.M.S. A47, S.P.G. ^^"103) ; then Trinity (Rev. Daniel Moore), £a,\ i (C.M.S. ^^"312, S.P.G. £99) St. James's (Rev. W. Abbott), ^^3 73 (C.M.S. ;^ 3 27, S.P.G. £\6) Lock Chapel (Rev. Flavel Cook), ^276 for C.M.S.; St. John's (Rev. Sir. E. Bayley), ;^209 (C.M.S. £171, S.P.G. ^38); St Matthew's, Bayswater (late Archdeacon Hunter),;^i6i for C.M.S. St. Augustine's, Kilburn (Rev.R.C.Kirkpatrick), ^119 for S.P.G. ; St. Michael's (Rev. G. F. Prescott), i^ioi for S.P.G. The larger portions of these last two sums were for special objects. The deanery of St. Pancras is the largest in the Arch- deaconry of Middlesex in respect of number of churches, there being thirty-three. Of these, sixteen, almost one half, appear in the lists of neither Society. Five supported both, four C.M.S. only, eight S.P.G. only. The whole amount raised was only £^,72, viz. C.M.S. ;^2 39, and S.P.G. ^233. No church exceeded ^^30, except two, viz. the parish church (Canon Spence), £il() for C.M.S., and £7 for S.P.G.; and Christ Church, Albany Street (Rev. J. W. Festing), ^107 for S.P.G. A large part of the deanery is poor, but there are several well-to do congregations in St. Pancras proper, and in Camden Town and Haverstock Hill. k We next come to the smallest deanery, in respect of number of churches, in the Archdeaconry of Middlesex, St. James's, WesTxMINSTER, which may be said to consist of Regent Street and part of Piccadilly, with streets adjacent. Of six churches, one gave to both Societies, three to S.P.G,, and two to neither. Total amount, £7'^, of which £(j\ was given by the Parish Church (Rev. J. E, Kempe), viz, £2/^ to C.M.S., and ;^37 to S.P.G. Lastly, in this. Archdeaconry, we come to St. Margaret's and St. John's, which comprises Westminster proper, with thirteen churches, of which three C.M.S., four S.P.G., three both, three neither. Total, C.M.S. ;^254, S.P.G. ;^iio. No church exceeded ^lOQ, Christ Church (Rev. H. E. P'ox) gave C.M.S. £%9 ; and St. Margaret's (Canon Farrar) gave C.M.S. £6\, and S.P.G. £2 i. The Archdeaconry of London brings us into the City, which The London Churches and Foreign Missions. 13 is divided into two deaneries, WEST CiTY and EAST CiTV. Under the Union of Benefices Act, and in other ways, many groups of old parishes have been amalgamated ; and in these cases the combined parishes are in my tables regarded as one, without reference to whether there be more than one church. Thus reckoned, WEST ClTY has forty-two parishes, and East City twenty-five. The total amount contributed by the whole of these together to the two Societies was ^^564 ; viz., ^^308 to C.M.S., and ^256 to S.P.G. In East City, one parish supported both, two C.M.S., six S.P.G., and sixteen neither. Ill West City, eleven gave to C.M.S., ten to S.P.G., and twenty-one to neither. Out of sixty-seven parishes, therefore, thirty-seven did nothing. The only one that exceeded ;^ioo was St. Stephen's, Coleman Street (Rev. J. W. Pratt), ;^i 10 to C.M.S. St. Michael's, Cornhill (Rev. W. Hunt), gave ^28 to C.M.S., and £21 to S.P.G. ; St. Dunstan's in the West (Rev. W. Martin, formerly Rev. E. Auriol), ;^38 to C.M.S. ; St Anne and St. Agnes (Rev. J. V. Povah), ^46 to S.P.G.; and ;^83 was collected at St. Paul's Cathedral for S.P.G. objects. In the Hackney deanery there are twenty-five churches, of which two supported both Societies, three CM.S., twelve S.P.G., and eight neither. Total, C.M.S., ;^220; S.P.G. ;^385. St. Mat- thew's, Upper Clapton (Rev. L. E. Shelford), combined with two other churches, gave S.P.G. ;^i 19; Ram's Chapel, Homerton (Rev. W. Baker), gave C.M.S. ;^io8 ; and Hackney Parish Church (Rev. A. Brook), gave £%7 to S.P.G., and ^12 to C.M.S. Islington deanery stands second in London in missionary contributions, and first by a long way in its support of C.M.S. Out of thirty-eight churches, thirty-five gave to that Society. One other, St. Saviour's, Highbury (Rev. J. Bicknell), supported S.P.G. only, and two did nothing. Of the thirty-five C.M.S. churches, five stand for small contributions to S.P.G. also. Total, S.P.G., £62, of which St. Saviour's gave ;^4i. Total, C.M.S. ^2,55 I. Ten churches exceeded ;^ioo ; viz., St. James's, Holloway (Rev. E. A. Stuart), £26'] ; St. Augustine's, High- bury (Rev. Gordon Calthrop), ^^239 ; St. Jude's, Mildmay (Rev. D. B. Hankin), £160 \ Holy Trinity (Rev. C. Julius), ^^145 ; St. Matthew's (Rev. U. Davies), ^135; St. Mary's, Plornsey Rise (Rev. R. Gunnery, now Rev, W, S. Lewis), ^130; Chapel of Ease (Rev. J. Strickland, afterwards Rev. G. W. Weldon, 14 The Londo7i Churches and Foreign Missions. now Rev. W. N. Winn), £\\g\ St Barnabas, Holloway (Rev. F. A. C. Lillingston), ;^iio; Christ Church, Highbury (Rev. W. J. Chapman), ;^I03 ; St. John's, Holloway (Rev. H. W. Dearden), ^102. Several others came very near i^ioo. The deanery of St. Sepulchre's comprises the Holborn, Clerkenwell, and City Road districts, with twenty-three churches, of which three gave to C.M.S., eight to S.P.G., and twelve to neither. Total, C.M.S. £71^ S.P.G. £jo. The district is mainly poor, but there are some fairly well-to-do middle-class con- gregations, and, it may be added, there is St. Alban's, Holborn. The only contributions reaching two figures were, St. Peter's, Clerkenwell (the Martyrs' Memorial Church, Rev. B. O. Sharp), £Zl for C.M.S. ; St. James's, Pentonville (Rev. S. D. Stubbs), £2(^ for C.M.S. ; St. Matthew's, City Road (Rev. W. Panck- ridge), ^32 for S.P.G. Shoreditch, which includes Hoxton and Haggerston, is another mainly poor deanery, with twenty-one churches, of which thirteen did nothing. Two supported both Societies, and six S.P.G. only; none C.M.S. only. Total, C.M.S. ;^ 14, S.P.G. ^^98, of which ^43 came from one church, St. John's, Hoxton (Rev. G. P. Pownall). The whole contribution is the smallest from any deanery in London, except St. Martin's-in- the-Fields ; but there the churches are much fewer in number. The " East End " proper is divided into two great dean- eries, Spitalfields and Stepney. SPITALFIELDS has twenty-five churches, of which thirteen did nothing. Two supported both Societies, six C.M.S., four S.P.G. Total, C.M.S. ^150, S.P.G. ;^2 2. More than one-third of the former sum, or ^58, came from St. Mary's, Whitechapel (Rev. A. J. Robinson).'" Stepney has forty-three churches, and is the largest deanery in this respect in London. Twenty-four churches did nothing ; ten were C.M.S., eight S.P.G., and one gave to both. Total, C.M.S. i^2 39. S.P.G. £^6. St. Anne's, Limehouse (Rev. S. Charlesworth), and St. Stephen's, Old Ford (Rev. R. Parnell), gave C.M.S. £a,7 each. This finishes the Diocese of London, so far as it comes within the scope of this article. * Spitalfields suffers in the calculation by the accidental non-payment within the year of the Christ Church (Rev. R. C. BiUing) contribution to C.M.S., amounting lu over £'^0. The Lo7idon Churches and Foreign Missions. i 5 " London over the Border," or those suburban regions of the East End which are in the county of Essex and Diocese of St. Albans, is all comprised in the one deanery of BarkinGj which includes East and West Ham, Stratford, Leyton, Wal- thamstow, Woodford, etc. There are forty churches, of which seventeen supported C.M.S., eight S.P.G., and fifteen neither Total, C.M.S. £^72, S.P.G. ^132. Eight combined churches in West Ham and Stratford gave C.M.S. ;^209 ; and three combined churches at Walthamstow gave it ^i 34. The largest S.P.G. contribution was from Barking parish church, ^^39. Crossing now to the south side of the Thames, we are in the Diocese of Rochester. The first deanery is Deptford, with eight churches, two of which gave C.M.S. £i2\, and four gave S.P.G. ;^20. Of the former sum, £gj was from St. John's (Canon Money). It should be stated that a new C.M.S. Association for Deptford has been lately established, which promises to increase the contribution to that Society largely. Greenwich deanery comprises not only Greenwich proper, but also part of Blackheath, Lee, Lewisham, Forest Hill, Sydenham, etc. Of twenty-seven churches, all but one did something for Missions ; five supporting both Societies, six C.M.S., and fifteen S.P.G. Total, C.M.S. £9^^'^ ; S.P.G. £\\6. More than half of the entire contributions came from three C.M.S. churches ; viz.. Holy Trinity, Lee (Rev. B. W. Bucke), £2^7 \ St. John's, Blackheath (Rev. J. W. Marshall), and Trinity, Sydenham (Rev. H. Stevens), ;^2 20 each.* The largest S.P.G. contribution was ^138 from five combined churches at Sydenham. Woolwich deanery, which includes also Charlton, Plum- stead, Eltham, and part of Blackheath, has twenty-five churches; viz., nine C.M.S., eight S.P.G., two both, six neither. Total, C.M.S. ^733, S.P.G. £go. Almost two-thirds of the whole missionary contributions of all the twenty-five churches came from one, St. Michael's, Blackheath (Rev. B. Baring-Gould), which gave C.M.S. £\79. KIdbrooke (Rev. J. C Leeke) gave C.M.S. i^i54, and S.P.G. ^27; all the other sums are inconsiderable. In the deanery of Battersea there are fifteen churches, of which eight support both Societies, two S.P.G. only, and five * Trinity, Sydenham, besides this, partly supports a missionary in the field. 1 6 The London Churches aiid Forei(rn Missions. neither. Total, C.M.S. £i\6, S.P.G. ^loi. Of the former sum, ;^83, and of the latter, £^^, came from the five combined churches of Canon Erskine Clarke. Camberwell, which includes Denmark Hill, Peckham, Dulwich, and Penge, has twenty-nine churches; viz., eight C.M.S., eleven S.P.G., three both, seven neither. Total, C.M.S. £907, S.P.G. £212,. Nearly one half of all that was raised by all the churches came from three of them; viz., ^272 from St. John's, Penge (Rev. D. McAnally), and ^262 from Camden Church (Canon Richardson) and St. Matthew's (Rev. C. E. Jones) toge- ther, both contributions being to C.M.S. Holy Trinity, Penge (Rev. T. S. Scott), gave C.M.S. ^^121, and S.P.G. ^14. The largest sum for S.P.G. was £^7, from St. Stephen's, South Dulwich (Rev. J. M. Clark). Clapham deanery, which includes also Brixton and part of Norwood, has eighteen churches, of which one supported both Societies, nine C.M.S., three S.P.G., five neither. Total, C.M.S. £1,210, S.P.G. £14.2. Of the latter sum, all except .^8 was from Clapham parish church and its chapel-of-ease (Rev. F. Bowyer). The C.M.S. contributions included St. Matthew's, Brixton (Rev. N. Garland), ;^3 57; St. James's, Clapham (Rev. A. C. Price, now Rev. W, H. Barlow), and St. Paul's, Clapham (Rev. G. Forrester), jointly, £zZ9\ St. Jude's, Brixton (Rev. R. B. Ransford), ^^150; Christ Church, Gipsy Hill (Rev. R. Allen), £1^0; All Saints, Clapham Park (Rev, A. G. Girdle- stone), £97. Here, again, more than half the sum raised by eighteen churches was raised by three of them. In the deanery of Kennington there are eleven churches ; three C.M.S., three S.P.G., one both, four neither. Total, C.M.S. i^293, S.P.G. £^9. Christ Church, North Brixton (Rev. J. McConnell Hussey), gave C.M.S. ^136. Lambeth deanery has also ten churches; seven C.M.S., two S.P.G., one neither. Total, C.M.S. ^^115, S.P.G. £26. The largest sum was £4.1 for C.M.S., from St. John's, Waterloo Road (Rev. A. W. Jephson). Newington deanery has thirteen churches; three CM.S., five S.P.G., one both, four neither. Total, C.M.S. £22>) S.P.G. £94, of which £6'^ was from the parish church (Rev. G, T. Palmer). SoUTIiWARK deanery, which includes Bermondsey and Ro- thcrhithc, is nearly as large as the three preceding together, The Londo7i ChurcJies aiid Foreign Missions. 17 having twenty-nine churches; eleven CM. S., seven S.P.G., three both, eight neither. Total, CM.S. ^303, S.P.G. £66. The Ber- mondsey churches led the way, four of them giving C.M.S.;^i8o, and of this exactly one half was from St. James's (Rev. W. Allan). The suburban deanery of BARNES comprises Putney, Wim- bledon, etc. Of fifteen churches, six supported both Societies, eight S.P.G. only, and one C.M.S. only. Total, C.M.S. Ai4, S.P.G. ;^ 349. Four combined churches at Wimbledon (Rev. H. W Haygarth) gave C.M.S. i:28i, and S.P.G. £91', and Emmanuel, Wimbledon (Rev. C. Skrine), £6\ to C.M.S. Mortlake (Rev. A. S. Shutte) gave CM.S. £6g, and S.P.G. £g^ ; and Putney gave S.P.G. £9Z- Kingston deanery includes also Richmond, Surbiton, etc. Of nineteen churches, ten supported C.M.S., four S.P.G., four both, one neither. Total, C.M.S. £i,\22, S.P.G. £^\A. In Richmond, four combined churches gave S.P.G. ^333 ; and two combined churches gave CM.S. ;^459. In Surbiton, Christ Church (Rev. J. W. Bardsley) gave CM.S. ^^314, and St. Mark's with St Andrew's (Rev. C Burney) gave S.P.G. ^170. In Kingston, five churches gave C.M.S. £26 a^. Streatham also has nineteen churches. This deanery in- cludes Wandsworth, Tooting, Balham, etc. Two churches sup- ported both Societies, seven C.M.S., five S.P.G., five neither. Total, CM.S. i^594, S.P.G. £21^. The CM.S. amount in- cluded ^200 from Immanuel, Streatham (Rev. S. Eardley), and ^195 from four combined churches at Wandsworth. The largest S.P.G contribution was £%J, from St. Peter's, Streatham. This finishes the Diocese of Rochester. Lastly, we include one deanery and part of another in the Arch-Diocese of Canterbury. Croydon deanery, which includes the southern parts of Norwood, has eighteen churches; viz., five C.M.S., nine S.P.G., three both, one neither. Total, C.M.S. £Z6\, S.P.G. ;^32;. The C.M.S. "Croydon Association" raised ;^804, of which ;^223 is entered against St. Matthew's (Rev. T. L. N. Causton), and ;^I20 against St. Mary Magdalene's (Rev. H. Glover); but another section of the total, a fund to provide an additional missionary, came in great part also from these two churches. The largest sum for S.P.G. was £"] ^ from the parish church. Of the deanery of WEST Dartford, I only tak'e Becken- 1 8 TJie London Churches and Foreign Missions. ham as within the London district. Of eight churches in that district, four did nothing. The parish church gave S.P.G. ;^I4I, and three others gave C.M.S. £\jZ. Putting all these figures together, and looking at them from different points of view, the following results are arrived at, some of which are very remarkable. 1. There are included in the calculation 835 churches. Of these, 103 supported both C.M.S. and S.P.G., 229 supported C.M.S. only, 248 supported S.P.G. only, and 255 supported neither, and, so far as the accounts of the two Societies bear witness, did nothing for Foreign Missions. Only in two dean- eries, Highgate and Barnes, did every church contribute. Of the 255, thirty-seven are in the City, seventy-seven in the poorer East and East-Central districts, thirty in what may be strictly called the West End, fifty-seven in other districts in Middlesex, and fifty-four on the south side of the Thames. 2. The whole amount contributed was ;?^3 2,404. Of this, ;^2 1,466 was given by 332 churches to C.M.S., and ;^io,93 8 by 351 churches to S.P.G. Of this latter sum, £y ^\6o was for the General Fund, and ;^3,778 for the Appropriated and Special Funds. The amount per church to C.M.S. was ^64; to S.P.G. ;^3i, of which ^i I was for Special Funds. 3. Of thirty-nine deaneries, S.P.G. had the largest number of churches in twenty-four; C.M.S. in fifteen. On the other hand, S.P.G. received the largest total amount in six only; viz., Ken- sington, St. George's (Hanover Square), St. James's (West- minster), Hackney, Shoreditch, and Newington ; C.M.S. in all the other thirty-three. 4. Just one half of the whole sum of ;^3 2,400 was contributed by the sixty churches which gave ;^ioo and upwards each. Or, taking a still narrower circle, twenty-two churches, giving i^2 50 and upwards each, contributed one-third of the whole. 5. Seven deaneries, viz., Kensington, St. Marylebone, Pad- dington, Islington, Hampstead, St. George's (Hanover Square), and Clapham, gave more than one half the whole sum. It should be observed, however, that the good position held by St. George's deanery in this and other comparisons is entirely due to St. Peter's, Eaton Square; which, as before noticed, con- tributed four-fifths of all that came from that deanery. The London Churches and Foreign Missions. 19 6. Of the ^10,938 contributed in all London to S.P.G., not much short of one-fourth came from that one church, St. Peter's, Eaton Square. 7. What does the "West End "proper give to Foreign Missions? The six deaneries of Kensington, Paddington, St. Marylebone, St. George's (Hanover Square), St. James's (Westminster), and St. Margaret's and St. John's (Westminster), may be regarded with tolerable accuracy as forming the West End. These six deaneries, comprising 120 churches, gave ^10,485, or an ap- parent average of £Z'j per church. But it is interesting to observe hov^ this was raised. Of the 120 churches, thirty gave nothing at all; twenty gave ;^8,i6o, or an apparent average of ;^408 each. But a truer impression is gained by eliminating St. Peter's, Eaton Square, when we find nineteen churches giving ;^5,297, or an average of ^276 each. The remaining seventy gave an average of only ;^ 3 3 each. Of the West End total, ;^io,485, there was contributed to C.M.S. ;^5,237, of which the ;^500 from St. Peter's was for a Special Fund; and to S.P.G. ^5,248, of which i^2,700 was for Special Funds. 8. Next let us see what the "East End" does; that is, London east of Temple Bar and north of the Thames, excluding Islington. In the eight deaneries of West City, East City, St. Sepulchre's, Shoreditch, Hackney, Spitalfields, Stepney, and Barking, there are 244 churches. Of these, exactly half, 122, did nothing at all. The remaining 122 gave ^1,574 to C.M.S., and i^i,oi9 to S.P.G. ; total, ^2,593, or an average of ;^2i each. 9. Then take London south of the Thames. There are fifteen deaneries, comprising 264 churches. Of these, fifty- four did nothing. The remaining 210 gave ;^7,958 to C.M.S., and i^2,8oi to S.P.G.; total, ^10,759, or an average of ^5 i per church. In all these average amounts "per church," it must be remem- bered that the sum does not represent church collections and offertories only, but all that is collected in the parish in any way, as annual subscriptions or donations, or by means of missionary boxes, sales of work, Sunday-schools, etc., etc. As regards C.M.S., it has been calculated that in the London district one-fourth of the whole amount contributed comes from church collections or offertories. Where a parish is well worked, the proportion is generally much less; that is to say, good 20 The Lo)idon Churches and Forei'orn Missions. t>' organization will produce by various means and agencies a total sum five, six, eight, and even ten times the amount given at the annual collection. This is especially the case in pooier parishes. A parish where the annual offertory for the Society is only^io can be made, without any undue pressure, simply by active and regular working, to produce ;^ioo; as a matter of fact, this is done in not a few cases. It is obvious, therefore, that many of those London churches which do most for Foreign Missions could, without any difficulty, do much more. And even if not one of the 255 that now appear to do nothing were gained by either Society, it would seem, considering how large a proportion of the whole amount contributed is given by a handful of churches, and how small are the average gifts of the. great majo- rity, that a very slight increase of missionary interest and zeal, and a very little effort in practical organizing, ought to double and treble the total contribution. We must not be misled by the imposing sound of thirty- two thousand pounds as the annual contribution of London to Foreign Missions (or say fifty thousand, to include " office lists " and gifts to other societies) ; nor by the fallacious argument that because the total exceeds that given to the Bishop of London's Fund and Bishop of Rochester's Fund, therefore Home Missions are neglected for the sake of the ends of the earth. The amount must be compared, not with that contributed to one or two prominent home institutions, but with what is given to them all. What is the average sum per church raised for local or other home objects — church expenses, additional clergy, lay agency, schools, and institutions of all sorts } Probably ^^300 a year is a long way under the mark ; yet that is five times the amount contributed for the evangeli- zation of the world. Certainly, if the temporal relief of the poor in various forms were included in home objects — and most givers do include them in the sense of reckoning them a counter-claim — the discrepancy is far greater. The ;^3 2,000 is equalled by the sum contributed on one Sunday for the London hospitals, and the proportion of that sum raised out- side the Church of England is comparatively small. The figures, indeed, are a most significant proof of the indif- ference still so widely felt concerning what is after all the one great duty laid upon the Church by her risen Lord. Martyn The London Churches and Foreign Missions. 21 and Mackenzie and Patteson are very good names wherewith to garnish an eloquent sermon or speech; but how many of those who ring the changes on these names really care as much for the cause they represent as for (say) the decoration of their own churches at a harvest festival ? As for the names of scores of missionaries who have done far more actual mis- sionary work than the three just mentioned, they are simply unknown to the Church of England at large. When the Guardian devotes more than a. hundred columns to the papers and speeches at the Derby Church Congress, but out of them allows exactly fifteen lines to the debate at that Congress on Foreign Missions, it is to be presumed that it knows its business. It so happens that one of the papers read in that debate was by no less a personage than Sir Bartle Frere, and although doubtless not written ad popidiim, and with an eye to the applause of an audience, was a most elaborate and exhaustive presentment on a subject of the first importance, the Organization of Native Churches, and had evidently cost the distinguished writer real pains and labour in preparation ; yet the Guardian^ after print- ing m extenso the majority of the regular papers, entirely sup- pressed this one. Nor can the editor, from a business point of view, be blamed. Why should space be wasted upon a paper which very few would read } And why should attention already fully occupied by Mr. Green and General Booth turn aside to examine the position and prospects of the growing native Chris- tian communities in India and China and Africa } Leave that to the good people who go to missionary meetings ! Thank God, the Missionary Societies do not depend for their main resources upon the average Churchman ; not even, with sorrow be it said, upon the average clergyman. In the present day the large majority of the clergy do think it a sort of duty to support, after a fashion, either S.P.G. or C.M.S ; but the real work done for them — for C.M.S. especially, but for S.P.G. also to some extent — is done by the few, and those few are enthu- siastic and whole-hearted. Go to the annual missionary meeting in a certain Kentish village of perhaps a thousand souls. See the small schoolrooms, opened out to their utmost extent, packed with an audience numbering five hundred — in fact, with the whole available population. Hear the secretary reading out the list of one hundred and eighteen missionary boxes, producing 22 The London Churches and Foreign Missions, together not much under ^loo. Mark the total contributions from that village, ^3 1 7, two-thirds of it made up of small sums. See the rapt attention with which that crowded gathering listens to two missionary speeches of an hour each, and then thinks the meeting has been too short. And then consider what might be done for Foreign Missions by a London parish whether it be in Belgravia, or whether it be in Bethnal Green. Vicars and churchwardens generally have yet to learn the lesson, the truth of which has been again and again tested by practical experience, that no one thing so surely secures large contributions for home objects as a Missionary Association heartily worked, just because it fosters the habit of unselfish giving; and that no one thing so fosters both deep spiritual life and practical godliness as a living interest in Foreign Missions. Many a parish is in a chronic state of struggle for life as regards its local agencies: how can it divert its scanty funds to Africa and China.? There is ''but a handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse." Then come Foreign Missions, like Elijah at Zarephath : " Make me thereof a little cake first." That is asking a hard thing. The poor widow — the poor parish — need have great faith to yield to such a plea. Yet assuredly the issue in the one case shall be the issue in the other. " She went and did according to the saying of Elijah; and she, and he, and her house did eat many days." ■*^ ^k *tJ .4^ 'r*: ^-^M ^m >:^.. j^ji 'sm. 't% ff^i V'i?^