and as Presbyteries were to determine the result, the Synods might form new ones in abundance to meet party purposes. Dr. Breckinridge said, "The Synods could split themselves into Presbyteries of three each; the Western Reserve had thus divided itself for no other purpose than to obtain power. Now let a year intervene, and it will be a year of contentions; it will bring up here an Assembly of unparalleled size; and it will put the orthodox into an unparalleled minority, because Old School men cannot condescend to do certain things to counteract such results."* There can be no doubt that the year would have been one of great agitation, and all to no purpose, except to increase existing difficulties. Fourthly. Another reason why the Old School were unwilling to risk any delay was that, in case the division was negatived by the Presbyteries-as it probably would be the work of Reformation would have to be begun anew. For one of the shrewd preliminary conditions of the New School side of the committee was this: "Pass a resolution suspending the operation of the controverted votes until after the next Assembly." Thus the Old School were required to give up all the ground they had won, and put themselves at the tender mercy of the men, whose past acts had been condemnatory of Old-fashioned doctrines and measures. The whole Reformation must have been again entered upon de novo, another year. In view of these reasons, the Old School wisely determined to take their stand against any delay. They were not "God's silly people" that time. The New School side of the Committee finding that they could not compass their plan, shifted their ground and proposed to refer to the Assembly the question whether to enter upon a division now, or to send the matter down to the Presbyteries. Also, if the Assembly decided in favour of immediate division, then the plan of the majority should be taken up for discussion; if otherwise, the plan of the minority. The Old School side replied as follows: "Understanding from the verbal explanations of the Committee of the minority, that the said committee would not consider either side bound by the vote of the Assembly, if it were against their views and wishes respectively on the point proposed to be submitted to its decision in said paper, to carry out in good faith a scheme which, in that case, could not be approved by them; and under such circumstances a voluntary separation being manifestly impossible, this committee consider the proposal of the minority as virtually a waver of the whole subject." The Old School side also stated, in their report to the Assembly: "It will be observed from our fifth paper, as compared with the fourth paper of the minority's Committee, that the final shape which their proposal assumed, was such, that it was impossible for the majority of the house to carry out its views and wishes, let the vote be as it might. For if the house should vote for the plan of the Committee of the majority, the other committee would not consider itself, or its friends, bound thereby: and voluntary division would therefore be impossible, in that case. But if the house should vote for the minority's plan, then the foregoing insuperable objections to that plan being supposed to be surmounted-still the whole case would be put off, perhaps indefinately." * Dr. Breckinridge furnished some striking facts to prove that some of the small Synods of the New School had more representatives in the Assembly than orthodox Synods of nearly twice the size. He also showed that "the orthodox in the Assembly represented 1200 ministers and the New School but 800; and yet these latter had by the evil arrangements of the ratio of representation, nearly got the former into their hands."-Presbyterian, June 3d, 1837. The object of the New School, in bringing the whole subject up for discussion in the Assembly, may have been to divert the attention of the Assembly from ulterior measures. A division, however, if voluntary, could not be brought about in the conflict of angry debate; and if the select committee could not agree, it was not at all likely that the two parties in the Assembly could come to any better understanding. So that, after a speech from Judge Jessup and another from Dr. Breckinridge, the whole matter was laid upon the table by a vote of 138 to 107. The Old School felt that they had been unfairly treated by the attempts of the other side to postpone a voluntary division of the Church for a year. We will add the following sentiments in concluding this article. 1. The Old School held out the olive branch of peace to their brethren, and not only offered them fair terms for a voluntary separation, but the best of all times to do the thing, which was now. 2. This effort to secure a peaceable division, in the midst of the Reformation and with a large majority for their general measures, does not sustain Dr. Judd's injurious imputation that the Old School struggled for mere power. 3. Policy often overreaches itself. The New School might have separated peaceably and with some credit to themselves. But wishing to reap the contingent advantages of a postponement, a part were put out of the Church by an act of legislation, and a part seceded from it in a way that must always be remembered to their disadvantage. But more of that hereafter. 4. The admissions of the New School (which they were wisely required to make in writing) fully justified the Old School in proceeding to reform the Church. Those brethren placed on record, "in an evil hour to themselves," two fundamental acknowledgments, viz., first, that there existed " differences of opinion in relation to important points of church policy and action as well as theological opinion;" and second, that "it is expedient that a division of the Church be effected." The Old School thought so too, and took them at their word; and as these brethren would not divide voluntarily and peaceably, they proceeded to "effect a division" by acts of constitutional legislation, commonly called the Exscinding Acts of which more particularly in another number. SKETCH OF THE REV. DAVID SMITH, ONE OF THE EARLY MINISTERS OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA. THE Rev. David Smith, the son of the Rev. Joseph Smith, inherited the prominent traits of both his parents, and by divine grace was made to resem ble them still more. He was born, it is believed, in Wilmington, Delaware, in 1772; and was seven or eight years of age when his parents entered western Pennsylvania. Even at this early age, his father, discovering in him an unusual readiness to learn, put a Latin grammar in his hands. At about the age of sixteen, there being no academy in the west, he accompanied his father to one of the meetings of the Synod of Virginia, and was there transferred to the care of Dr. John B. Smith, then president of Hampden Sidney College. Under the ministry of that distinguished man, it is believed he was hopefully converted to God; and soon directed all his studies with a view to the gospel ministry. His close application to study had nearly broken down a constitution by no means vigorous, when by the advice of his friends and his spiritual father he took an excursion as a travelling companion with the Rev. Dr. Hill, who had been then recently licensed and appointed to itinerate for six months in the lower counties of Virginia. Dr. Hill some years before his death, furnished the writer with the following notices respecting their journey and the subject of this notice. * The last volume of the PRESBYTERIAN MAGAZINE, contains a long and interesting account of the life of the Rev. Joseph Smith, one of the pioneers in Western Pa. Among the important items of that biography is the discussion whether Joseph Smith or John McMillan established the Academy, whose succession has been kept up at Canonsburg. That article brings proof in favour of the former. Ed. "Although he had not commenced his trials for licensure, yet as he was near finishing his collegiate course, and had the ministry in view, I determined to call upon him occasionally to pray and give an exhortation at the close of my sermons-as we were not very rigidly bound to church rules and customs in those days. We set off upon our itinerations about the 1st of Nov. 1790. Among my first sermons, at an old deserted meeting house, upon the borders of Powhatan, I called upon him to conclude the services by exhortation and prayer. He attempted it, but was most excessively frightened; yet made out better than he thought he did. He was of a very timid and modest disposition. His fright was so great that it was many weeks before I could prevail upon him to undertake it again, except to take part in family worship. However, he did rally over it before our six months were expired. When we arrived at Col. Gordon's we were introduced into a large company of persons, apparently gay and fashionable in their dress and with all the stiff formality of worldly etiquette-so different from what we expected from the accounts we had received of the piety of Col. Gordon and his family, that a very unfavourable impression was made upon both of us, so that after we went to bed, Mr. Smith very seriously proposed that we should set off next morning and leave the place, not believing that any good could be done among a people so gay and thoughtless. But we soon became convinced, that under all this gaiety and formality, so different from what we ever saw before among professors of religion-were some of the most pious and devout Christians we ever met with. During the six or eight months we staid there, we found in his family as comfortable a home as we ever had and a considerable and promising excitement upon religious subjects prevailed through the country." Thus was this young man trained in part for his work. We doubt whether more of this sort of schooling would be of any disadvantage in our day. Mr. Smith returned to his college and in due time graduated. His diploma is honoured with the name of a president whose memory ought to be more known and revered than it is. Dr. John B. Smith, the principal instrument of the great revival in Virginia, of 1787-1789 and 1790, was one of the brightest luminaries of our church. David Smith, on his return to his father's house, after spending the time there usual in his studies for the ministry, was licensed to preach the gospel, and in the course of the ensuing year, receiving a call to the united churches of George's Creek and the Tent, in Fayette county, was ordained and settled there. He soon after married a daughter of the Rev. Dr. Power, (his daughter Rebecca, the first child born in a minister's family west of the Allegheny mountains, in Dec. 1776.) Mr. Smith laboured with great success in this his first field, for about four years; when he removed to the Forks of Yough, in Westmoreland county, and took charge of the congregations of Rehoboth and Roundhill, then vacant by the death of the Rev. James Finley. Here he preached till he died. His labours were arduous and unsparing. Towards the close of his career, his talents as a preacher shone out with great power. It was commonly remarked that the mantle of his father had fallen upon him. He became also one of the editors of the Western Religious Magazine, and was appointed by his Presbytery (of Redstone) as one of the visitants of their academy at Canonsburgh. But he finished his work at a still earlier age than his father. A revival of religion had commenced in his congregations. He laboured beyond his strength to meet the increased demand for his services. A new brick meeting house (the first country brick house of worship ever built in the West) had been fitted up, in an unfinished state for the temporary reception of the crowded night meetings. Mr. Smith preached his last sermon on Friday night in the month of August, 1803, in this new house; reached home with fever and headache, and ten days after, his spirit took its flight from earth. His death bed was a scene of the triumph of faith. He received and exhorted his elders, and many of his people, as long as his strength lasted. He sent for two of the most respectable citizens of the county, who had been at variance for some time, reconciled them and made them shake hands across his dying bed. His weeping people bore his mortal remains to the grave near the Church where he preached his last sermon. On his tomb-stone are these words: "Sacred to the memory of the Rev. DAVID SMITH, late pastor of the united congregations of Rehoboth and Roundhill, who departed this life Aug. 24th, 1803, in the thirty-second year of his age. He was a sound divine, a faithful pastor and pathetic preacher. The word of God by him dispensed, will prove to many in this place a savour of life unto life, or of death unto death." It is said that the unexpected death of this young servant of God produced a very widefelt sensation, and was made instrumental in giving fresh impulse to that greatest of all revivals that has ever been in the West. Great expectations were entertained of his future eminence. It was at the beginning of an extensive work of grace, when he had, apparently, received himself a fresh baptism of the Holy Ghost. Most of the ministers around preached sermons to the people in reference to it. But he was immortal till his work was done. The Rev. Dr. Wm. Wylie, his brother-in-law, succeeded him in his pastoral charge. NOTE. We are desirous of making the "Historical and Biographical" department of the PRESBYTERIAN MAGAZINE the repository of contributions of permanent value. Who will send biographical sketches of Dr. James Hall, Dr. Waddell, Dr. Speece, Dr. Blythe, &c., &c.. and historical notices of old churches? Such articles would be of great general interest. Ed. Review and Criticism. THE CONFLICT OF AGES: or the great Debate on the moral relations of God to man. By EDWARD BEECHER, D.D., Boston. Phillips, Sampson & Co. 1853. In our judgment, the conflict of ages has been between those who receive the simple statements of the Word of God, and those who endeavour to amend them by human reason. The devil began the conflict with Adam, and Cain took it up against Abel; and since then, there has been every variety of opposers, skeptics and madmen down to these times of Dr. Beecher. Is the world growing crazy? No, it began crazy. Adam's sin has made havoc with learned men and all the race. Dr. Beecher is a great man and a good Christian; but he has stumbled, and fallen into absurdity. His theory is, that the great debate about original sin is settled by our having had a trial in a pre-existing state. He actually supposes that every descendant of Adam existed before our first father, as we have been accustomed to call him; and having voluntarily sinned against God in a previous condition of life, is now sent by a species of transmigration into a human body to a new existence in this world. Dr. Beecher's theory would be simply a harmless piece of folly, were it not for the fact that he proposes it as the only solution by which to reconcile the present constitution of things with the character of God. He goes through an elaborate argument to prove that, on the evangelical hypothesis, the facts in regard to human depravity are irreconcilable with divine goodness and justice. God is placed upon trial for his works and ways, and is convicted. This book accordingly affords ample scope for exultation to the Unitarians of Boston and to all infidels and unbelievers. This theory of a pre-existent state of human probation, is at variance with the scriptures. The Bible account declares that Adam was the first man, that sin was introduced by him, and that in consequence of this, all men are born sinners. "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world and death by sin, and so death hath passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." But according to Dr. B., sin came into the world in a very different way; and Adam must have lived long before his earthly creation, unless he was an exception to the general pre-existence. The Bible clearly reveals that the first man was holy after the image of God, and having sinned, he begat children in his own likeness and after his own image. The Bible also, in sustaining God's absolute sovereignty, declares respecting Jacob and Esau, "the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil" which is false, if they had sinned in a former state of existence. Furthermore, the Bible refers to deeds done "in the body," in this present world, as the things which shall be judged in the great day of the Lord. The sins of a pre-existing world are no where alluded to. Another of the objections to Dr. Beecher's theory is that the soul is unconscious of having had a probation in another world. Even the stories of the Arabian Nights preserve the identity of persons who transmigrate, and give them a consciousness of the past in their new form of life. But this sacred story of Boston Night makes the world transmigrate from the night |