IN December, 1858, I was united in marriage to Miss Mary Ann Reid, sister of the Rev. Richardson Reid (then incumbent of Trinity Church). We had known each other for years, and the attachment, I think, was mutual. She was rather of a retiring disposition, and was well satisfied to be "a keeper at home." This suited me, as I had determined not to waste any of my precious time in unprofitable visitation or conversation. In most respects we were like-minded; and in course of time, though her religious training had been received, like mine, in the Church of England, she ultimately adopted the views I had accepted regarding baptism and other New Testament teachings. I think that her Anglican relations did not quite approve of our union, and this probably occasioned a little coolness toward me, but there was no decided breach. A mother-in-law is popularly supposed to be a source of dissension; but I knew my mother to be a woman of too much good sense to create discord after having agreed to the union. Happily, therefore, no domestic strife disturbed our peaceful home; and I was enabled to devote myself to the duties I had undertaken in connection with the Christian Advocate, and continue my preaching engagements, without any distraction of mind.

      On June 10, 1860, my wife gave birth to a son, which event she only survived a few days, so that, instead of rejoicing, our home was turned into one of mourning. On June 25 she peacefully passed away, assuring us that she was not afraid to die, having a good hope of eternal life. It has been said that troubles seldom come singly, because one often leads to another. My mother, having devoted so much time and [283] attention to the infant and its nurse, contracted a severe cold through exposure, and was seized with a violent attack of bronchitis. She was desirous that my brother and myself should nurse her, and we were happy to comply with her request. We entered upon the work systematically, and arranged to take so many hours each during the day and night, so that we could rest alternately when off duty. My mother received unremitting attention, and after a fortnight we had the pleasure of seeing signs of recovery in our patient. As my mother at this time was not far from 70 years of age, her recovery, after such a severe attack, was the more remarkable. After serving this apprenticeship, we were almost competent to undertake nursing; but other work awaited us.

      The later trouble had the effect of partially diverting my attention from my former one; but the cry of the motherless infant was a constant reminder of it. My mother, on her recovery, took a lively interest in the little stranger, and became a second mother to him. I felt my position to be a trying one, but, like others before and after that time, not more than I could bear. I was graciously sustained by Divine help, and found the faithful God true to His promises in this my time of need. As I had decided to discontinue the publication of the Christian Advocate, I had to consider as to the way in which I could best occupy my time. In the first place I decided to obtain employment in the printing business; and as there was an opening in the Government Printing Office, my friend Mr. W. C. Cox offered the position to me. This, combined with my preaching engagements, fully occupied my time and attention. In addition to the last-named I accepted the position, temporarily, of Superintendent of Bentham Street Christian Sunday-school. This brought me more immediately into contact with Mr. T. Playford, the pastor of the Church, who occasionally gave me preaching appointments at Hindmarsh and Mitcham. I also consented to take an occasional service at a Union Chapel at Edwardstown, where I helped for several months; then my services were rather unceremoniously dispensed with. On one occasion I made incidental reference to baptism, which, I suppose, I ought not to have done; but it was by no means an address on the subject. It was customary for a conveyance to be sent to take me and bring me back, but when it was my turn, after the address referred to, I was left waiting in vain for the usual conveyance, which was not again sent for me. I thought that I should have been advised of the fact that my services were no longer required, [284] and I certainly would not have been offended at receiving such an intimation. Subsequently I received an apology, and thanks for my past services. I think that Christians, above all, ought to be courteous to one another, however much they may differ in doctrine or opinion. I remember riding in a public conveyance once when a lady asked a minister of religion, who was sitting beside her, a civil question about the destination of the vehicle. In reply, he gave her rather a rude or unsatisfactory answer. When the minister alighted, the lady remarked that he had the dress of a gentleman but not the manners of one. I knew the gentleman, but I did not let her know, feeling a little ashamed at the way in which he had behaved. I mention this not as any reflection upon ministers of religion generally--who, as a rule, I believe, are exemplary in this respect--but as more is frequently expected from them than from others, it behoves them to be quite up to the standard.

      In 1860 the Gawler Institute offered a prize of at least 200 guineas for the best history of South Australia from its foundation up to date. The amount was to be raised by subscription, and it was intimated that each subscriber of one guinea would receive a copy of the work when published. A competent committee was appointed to examine and adjudicate upon the efforts submitted. I did not for a moment imagine that there would be many competitors, or that many persons had the material necessary for the compilation of such a work. For several years previously I had gathered a great deal of information concerning the early history of the Colony, without the slightest idea, at the time, of utilising it in any particular way; and the offer referred to led me to entertain the thought that here was an opportunity to turn it to practical account. The idea expanded to such an extent that I at last decided to enter upon this arduous and tedious undertaking. The progress of the work must be reserved far another chapter.

      As my mother suffered from weakness after her attack of bronchitis, and as my motherless boy needed maternal care, I took to myself in marriage one whom the Lord had provided to be a wife and a mother. The Wise Man says that "a prudent wife is from the Lord"; and a shrewd woman has advised those in search of such a partner to "choose a good daughter of a good mother." I may safely say that Agnes Neill, who joined her fortunes with mine on November 11, 1861, fully answered the description. Her parents were respected by all who knew them, and commanded a very extensive circle of friends. The father, [285] Mr. Thomas Neill, was for many years the accountant in the office of the South Australian Company, and when he retired from the service a liberal annuity was allowed him, which he enjoyed for several years. The mother had equal renown for her hospitality and for her interest in the poor. My wife's brothers have occupied important positions in the Colony; one a merchant and ship-owner, another Commissioner of Railways, the third manager of a bank, and the fourth a respectable farmer. Better than all this they were Christians, pillars of the Baptist denomination in the Colony, and held in high esteem. Two married sisters also, though not so widely known, were in degree equally respected. My wife, having been brought up in the Baptist tenets, we were of one accord in this matter. It only needs to be added that as a careful and economical housewife no man, unless he were utterly unreasonable, could desire a better. An ancient injunction bids us to "beware of flatterers"; and I can truly affirm that whatever the faults of my partner--and she never claimed to be immaculate--flattery was certainly not one of them. She would criticise, and, if need were, correct me; but never praise nor flatter. She was probably aware that anything of this kind would have made me proud, and led me to think too highly of myself--proving herself a "prudent woman" in this, as well as in other respects. The issue of this marriage was two daughters, both of whom, as well as my only son, were baptised at an early age.

      In 1861 a tract was put into circulation in the Colony entitled "Dipping not Baptising"; and though the author had selected a word not in common use among Baptists, it was not difficult to understand what he meant. The title--an unnecessarily offensive one--was only the beginning of a most audacious attempt to establish the sprinkling of an infant as Scriptural baptism. It was no small matter to bid defiance to the declarations of the learned in nearly all ages of the Christian era as to the correct meaning of the untranslated word baptizo (or "baptise," in the Authorised Version). The writer of the tract in question was a law unto himself, and evidently intended to make up in bold and unwarranted assertions what was wanting in authority of any standing in support of the untenable position he had assumed. I had read several Pædobaptist productions, but this one excelled them all in sophistry and disingenuity. I felt that I could not allow such an attack as this on baptism, as taught in the New Testament and practised by the Apostles and early Christians, to pass unchallenged. I accordingly published a [286] 12-page pamphlet dealing with the one that had been put into circulation. It was in the form of a trial before a judicial tribunal. The title of my pamphlet was "Sprinkling not Baptising versus Dipping not Baptising"; and I determined that all the witnesses called upon for evidence should be Pædobaptists, or those who did not practice immersion. The following is a summary of the evidence I placed before the Court of Public Opinion in the aforesaid trial:

      Martin Luther:--"Baptism is a Greek word, and may be translated immersion, as when we immerse something in water, that it may be wholly covered."

      John Calvin:--"The word baptism signifies to immerse, and it is certain that immersion was the practice of the Ancient Church."

      Archbishop Tillotson:--"Anciently those who were baptised put off their garments, which signified the putting off the body of sin; and were immersed and buried in the water, to represent their death to sin; and then did rise up out of the water, to signify their entrance upon a new life: and to these customs the Apostle Paul alludes (Rom. vi. 2-6)."

      Bishop Jeremy Taylor.--"The custom of the ancient Churches was not sprinkling, but immersion, in pursuance of the sense of the word (baptize) in the commandment, and the example of our blessed Lord."

      Dr. Whitby:--"It being so expressly declared here (Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12) that we are 'buried with Christ in baptism' by being buried under water; and the argument to oblige us to a conformity to His death by dying to sin being taken hence; and immersion being religiously observed by all Christians for thirteen centuries; and approved by our Church; and the change of it into sprinkling, even without any allowance from the Author of this institution, or any licence from any Council of the Church, being that which the Romanist still urgeth to justify his refusal of the cup to the laity: it were to be wished that this custom might be again of general use, and aspersion duly permitted as of old, in case of the clinici, or in present danger of death."

      Richard Baxter:--"It is commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists [now generally called Baptists], as our commentators declare, that in the Apostles' time the baptised were dipped over head in the water; and that this signified their profession, both of believing in the burial and resurrection of Christ, and of their own present renouncing the world and flesh; or dying to sin and living to Christ; or rising again to newness of life; or [287] being buried and risen again with Christ, as the Apostle expoundeth (Col. iii. and Rom. vi.)."

      Doctor Philip Doddridge:--"In reference to Rom. vi. 4, it seems the part of candor to confess that here is an allusion to the manner of baptising by immersion, as most usual in those early times."

      George Whitefield:--"It is certain that, in the words of our text (Rom. vi. 3, 4), there is an allusion to the manner of baptism, which was by immersion."

      John Wesley, in commenting on the words, "Buried with Him," says this was "alluding to the ancient manner of baptising by immersion."

      Dr. Greville Ewing:--"'Baptizo.'--In its primary and radical sense, 'I cover with water.' It is used to denote, first, "I plunge, or sink completely under water."'

      Dr. James MacKnight:--"In baptism, the rite of initiation into the Christian Church, the baptised person is buried under the water, as one put to death on account of sin, in order that he may be strongly impressed with a sense of the malignity of sin, and excited to hate it as the greatest of evils (Rom. vi. 3)."

      Dr. Thomas Chalmers, in reference to Rom. vi. 4, says: "The original meaning; of the word 'baptism' is immersion, and though we regard it as a point of indifference whether the ordinance so named be performed in this way or by sprinkling, yet we doubt not but the prevalent style of the administration in the Apostolic days was by an actual submerging of the whole body under water."

      Mosheim's "Ecclesiastical History," in the section dealing with the first century, says:--"The sacrament of baptism was administered in this century without the public assemblies, in places appointed and prepared for the purpose; and was performed by the immersion of the whole body in the baptismal font."

      Neander's "History of the Christian Religion":--"Baptism was originally administered by immersion, and many of the comparisons of St. Paul allude to this form of its administration."

      Encyclopedia Ecclesiastica.--"It is evident that, during the first ages of the Church, and for many centuries afterwards, the practice of immersion prevailed."

      Sir David Brewster, in the article "Baptism," in the "Edinburgh Encyclopedia," says:--"Baptism (derived from the Greek word baptizo, to dip, or tinge) is the initiatory rite in the Christian religion. Baptism, in the Apostolic age, was performed by immersion." [288]

      Dr. Wall, in his "History of Infant Baptism," alluding to immersion as the proper action of baptism, says:--"This is so plain and clear, by an infinite number of passages, that, as one cannot but pity the weak endeavors of such Pædobaptists as would maintain the negative of it, so we ought to disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some people give to the English anti-Pædobaptists [Baptists] merely for the use of dipping; when it was, in all probability, the way by which our blessed Saviour, and, for certain, was the most usual and ordinary way by which the ancient Christians did receive their baptism. 'Tis a great want of prudence, as well as of honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary what is certainly true, and may be proved so. It creates a jealousy of all the rest that one says."

      Professor Campbell:--"I have heard a disputant, in defiance of etymology and use, maintain that the word rendered baptise means more properly to sprinkle than to plunge; and, in defiance of all antiquity, that the former was the earliest and the most general practice in baptising. One who argues in this manner never fails, with persons of knowledge, to betray the cause he would defend; and though, with respect to the vulgar, bold assertions generally succeed as well as argument, and sometimes better, yet a candid mind will always disdain to take the help of falsehood, even in the support of truth."

      In addition to the foregoing well-known authorities I cited names of about fifty other eminent lexicographers and Greek scholars belonging to the Pædobaptist school, all of whom gave primary meaning of the Greek word baptizo, or baptise, as immersion. My pamphlet had an extensive circulation--in fact it went out of print; and some years afterwards, when I wanted a copy, I could not procure one till, in a singular way, I succeeded. While conducting the business of the Bible Hall which I had established in 1884, someone came with my pamphlet to enquire where he could procure a fresh supply. I willingly supplied him with several Baptist tracts in exchange for mine, which, though the worse for wear, and showing signs of having been well used, I was pleased to possess. I may mention that though this tract was put forth without any reference to me or my name, some of the knowing ones, I found, had an idea of the source from whence it came, and gave me the credit of it.

      The reason for the printing and circulation of the tract on the Pædobaptist side of the question was, there is little doubt, a progressive movement on the part of the Baptists, who had sent for a Baptist minister from England. This led to the arrival in [289] the Colony of the Rev. S. Mead, to take charge of the Baptist Church formed in South Adelaide, whose meetings were held in the building then known as "White's Rooms" (now the Bijou Theatre), in King William Street. On the occasion of a demonstration in this place by the newly-formed Baptist Church, some of my friends took the liberty of supplying those present, as they were leaving, with a copy of my pamphlet. As this was done without the knowledge and consent of the Church, it was not considered by any means an act of kindness, even though the Baptists might be prepared to endorse all that the pamphlet contained. The real ground of offence appeared to be, that while the speakers at the meeting had been saying kind things about their Pædobaptist brethren, the circulation of this tract might be construed into an overt act of hostility. It was quite natural for many who received the tract at the door as they left, to conclude that its distribution had been undertaken with the sanction and approval of the newly-formed Baptist Church; but such was really not the case.

      The formation of the Baptist Church in South Adelaide, under the pastorate of the Rev. S. Mead, was an important event in the history of the Baptists of South Australia; and from this time they made steady progress. Previously they had, for the most part, united with the Congregationalists, and some of the most useful and influential members of the latter body were Baptists in principle. These now rallied round Mr. Mead, and,, with their aid, he commenced his ministerial labors under most favorable auspices. In course of time a large and substantial building was erected in Flinders Street, at a cost of several thousands of pounds, towards which the Hon. G. F. Angas was a very large contributor.

      Not long after Mr. Mead's arrival, Mr. H. S. Earl, an evangelist, came to Adelaide, and began laboring in connection with the Disciples, or Church of Christ. He also engaged White's Rooms for his services, and being an able and eloquent speaker, he drew large audiences. It was found necessary to enlarge the chapel in Grote Street to about twice its original size, and large numbers were baptised and added to the Church. From the forward movement on the part of the Baptists and Disciples, it did not seem that the puerile attempt put forth in the tract entitled "Dipping not Baptising" deterred many from obeying the command of the Lord Jesus. As a general rule, opposition to truth, and the oppression or persecution of those who adhere to it, instead of arresting progress, give an impetus to it; and hence [290] the sage advice of Gamaliel is as good and profitable now as when uttered:--"Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God" (Acts v. 38, 39).

      Some time before the arrival of Mr. Mead it occurred to me that Baptist testimony was weak on account of the divided state of those who believed in and practised the immersion of believers. Under this conviction I called a meeting of the pastors and leaders of the existing Churches in Adelaide, to ascertain whether any plan could be adopted for closer communion and co-operation: Pastors Stonehouse, Playford, Prince; and others, responded to the invitation. The basis of union I submitted was to embrace those Churches practising the immersion of believers, without respect to their peculiar doctrines, order of worship, or internal management. This seemed to meet with general approval, with the exception of the representatives of the Particular Baptists; but as the matter was not taken up very heartily, no further steps were taken at that time. In after years the Baptist Association made overtures to the Churches of Christ and the Christian Churches (all of which practise the immersion of believers) to unite with that organisation, and even made an alteration in its constitution to admit them; but these were unsuccessful. This is to be regretted, as the union of all these Churches would have given an aggregate, at the time I write, of between fifty and sixty Churches in South Australia practising believers' baptism. The desire for union is strong in certain directions, as is evidenced by the various branches of the Methodist family seeking to be united into one Church; and the factors in the Baptist communion may yet see it to be desirable to bear a united testimony to the truth that distinguishes them from other Christians.

      Suggestions have been made, especially in England, as to the union of the Baptists and the Congregationalists, but there are insuperable difficulties in the way of such an amalgamation. Were the Baptists prepared to yield the question of "immersion," there is nothing whatever to prevent the two bodies from uniting, but so long as Baptists regard this form of administration as the only way by which they can obey the command of the Lord Jesus, they cannot consistently and conscientiously give it up. Union Chapels, in which the congregations are mainly composed of Baptists and Congregationalists, have been able to pursue the even tenor of their way so long as the numbers are pretty evenly balanced and the question of baptism not agitated; but when a [291] Baptist minister is pastor, and the Baptists predominate, there is almost sure to be a disruption and a division. This was notably so, many years ago, at Angaston, and it not only led to division, but to bitter feeling on each side. The outcome of this was the erection of another place of worship by the Congregationalists, who felt that they had not been treated fairly by their Baptist brethren. Henry Ward Beecher, in America, adopted a novel method for overcoming the difficulty in regard to sprinkling and immersing, by having a font in one part of the place of worship for sprinkling infants, and a baptistery in another part for the immersion of believers. This was certainly not the "one baptism" mentioned by the Apostle Paul, and was calculated to place some in a difficulty as to which form of administration they should adopt. If the sprinkling of an infant be Scriptural baptism, let it be universally adopted; but if it have no warrant in the Word of God, let it be universally abandoned. [292]

[CLACE 283-292]