ritten
as would do it justice, but I feel that in such a work as the present it
is better not to attempt a task, the proper performance of which would
make demands upon the space and time at my disposal that could not be
easily met.

There was one _role_ in which Dr. Ryerson pre-eminently excelled--that
of a controversialist. There was nothing spasmodic in his method of
controversy, although there might be in the times and occasions of his
indulging in it. He was a well-read man and an accurate thinker. His
habit, when he meditated a descent upon a foe, was to thoroughly master
the subject in dispute; to collect and arrange his materials, and then
calmly and deliberately study the whole subject--especially the weak
points in his adversary's case, and the strong points of his own. His
habits of study in early life contributed to his after success in this
matter. He was an indefatigable student; and so thoroughly did he in
early life ground himself in English subjects--grammar, logic,
rhetoric--and the classics, and that, too, under the most adverse
circumstances, that, in his subsequent active career as a writer and
controversialist, he evinced a power and readiness with his tongue and
pen, that often astonished those who were unacquainted with the
laborious thoroughness of his previous mental preparation.

It was marvellous with what wonderful effect he used the material at
hand. Like a skilful general defending a position--and his study was
always to act on the defensive--he masked his batteries, and was careful
not to exhaust his ammunition in the first encounter. He never offered
battle without having a sufficient force in reserve to overwhelm his
opponent. He never exposed a weak point, nor espoused a worthless cause.
He always fought for great principles, which to him were sacred, and he
defended them to the utmost of his ability, when they were attacked. In
such cases, Dr. Ryerson was careful not to rush into print until he had
fully mastered the subject in dispute. This statement may be questioned,
and apparent examples to the contrary adduced; but the writer knows
better, for he knows the facts. In most cases Dr. Ryerson scented the
battle from afar. Many a skirmish was improvised, and many a battle was
privately fought out before the Chief advanced to repel an attack, or to
fire the first shot in defence of his position.

A word as to the character of this work. It may be objected that I have
dealt largely w