but is what the Lord himself teaches or is trying to teach mankind through him.
Let me endeavor to make my view more clear by an illustration:—
A man is duly accredited by our government to the court of St. James. Upon all important matters between the two countries, he receives his instruction from Washington. And if he acts according to his instruction, the things he does as the authorized agent of the government, are not to be regarded merely as his acts, but the acts of the government; and the government alone is responsible for them. But in carrying on some negotiation. Mr. Adams or Mr. Motley, in the exercise of the freedom and discretion of a plenipotentiary, may here and there drop a word or use an expression which his government might not approve; but that is of small consequence if it does not prevent nor in any way interfere with the negotiation. He may not, in every interview with the British minister of foreign affairs, or at every court dinner, do and say exactly the thing that the government from which he is accredited would approve; but if he carries out his instructions generally, does his duty faithfully, and so accomplishes the purpose of his mission, is he any the less the accredited American minister, or his acts any the less cheerfully endorsed by his government because of an occasional and unimportant remark made by him, which the authorities at Washington might not approve?
