the second a whig and Erastian churchman, and the third a radical and political dissenter, shaking hands, and with "hail, fellow, well met," join in the attempt to overthrow the great bulwark of the Scottish constitution. This friendship reminds us of that recorded in Scripture, which took place between Herod and Pontius Pilate when Christ was to be sacrificed - the two foes were reconciled; so, in the present case, the church stands in the room of Christ, and she being to be sacrificed, the foes have become friends. This often occurs; men who have been sworn foes, have at once hushed up their differences, and, with determined zeal, directed their united weapons against the body of the Lord Christ Jesus. But it is well known, that implicit reliance cannot be placed on those three venerable champions of Erastianism, seeing that truth does not stand prominently forward as part of their charac

ters.

The

As to the "Scotsman," no falsehood was ever too large for its columns, provided it would be believed by its readers. bitterness of feeling with which it treats every thing relating to a church establishment, and more particularly as regards a reformed establishment, lowers it at once to the debased level of the "Weekly Dispatch,' a journal whose glory is blasphemy, and whose delight is derision of Christianity. The "Advertiser," on the other hand, has a pretended zeal for Christianity, but it is of that dull, cold, and lifeless description, that so characterizes the party to which it professes adherence. As to the "Observer," it is now a nonentity; its opinions no one ever thinks of attending to; the days of old have have come upon it. With these we may class the "Aberdeen Journal," whose assertions in religious matters are generally taken at their value-nothing. In fact, if the character of the press which supports Erastianism was canvassed to-morrow, it would be found that it bears a very close resemblance to that of the papers we have attempted to describe.

For some years prior to 1834, the church had been called to maintain a violent struggle in her own defence, against the foes of church establishments. And its being remarked that her opponents attached much importance to that act of Queen Anne, which restored patronage, attention began to be drawn towards it, which revived all the ancient feelings of dissatisfaction which had so long rankled in the hearts of the Scottish people. In consequence of the immense number of petitions to the House of Commons for the abolition of patronage, a select committee was appointed in 1834, to investigate the subject for the devising of means to quell the increasing agita

tion. In the mean time the non-intrusion clergy, who had so long been in the minority, acquired a majority, and passed the Veto Act, which declared "that it is a fundamental law of this church, that no pastor shall be intruded on any congregation, contrary to the will of the people.' The principle therein embodied being held by the law officers of the crown, and the Lord Chancellor, as being consistent with the act of Queen Anne, which restored patronage. And this Veto Act was not only sanctioned by the late whig government, but by many leading conservatives, and appeared to meet the concurrence of men of all parties. The measure having been carried, was immediately acted upon, and in five years, upwards of 250 clergymen were settled under it, forming a body of ministers more respectable and efficient, than had ever, in the past history of the church, been admitted during a similar period. The minority acted in concert with the Vetoists, and their leader, Dr. Cook, in 1836, declared that "Judging from the rapid improvements made, he had sanguine hopes, if the measure got fair play, it would prove a blessing to the people, and might be the means of doing much good tothe country." And yet this very man, with the grossest inconsistency, comes forward and declares this act to be opposed to the law of the land, and an undue assumption of power on the part of the general assembly. And in this ridiculous assertion that party concurred who had acquiesced in the carrying out of a measure, acknowledged by themselves to be, "a blessing to the people, and the instrument of much good to the country." One of the beneficial results of this measure was the return of a considerable number of dissenting congregations to the bosom of that church, from which the anti-Christian act of Queen Anne had driven them.

About this time there occurred the Auchterarder case, in which Earl Kinnoul was induced to lend his name as the prosecutor of the church, the decision of which was that, the Veto was illegal, which verdict was afterwards confirmed by the House of Lords in May 1839, as being incompatible with patrons' rights as restored by that statute. Lord Kinnoul has therefore the honour of having been the first nobleman who directed the weapons of persecution against the church of Christ in Scotland during the present struggle. The church, on the decision of the law courts being declared, acted in the only way in which, as the church of Christ, and a recognised legal ecclesiastical spiritual tribunal she could have been expected to do, and at once refused to sacrifice her principles at the shrine of the state. The church had good grounds for adhering to these principles.

In the first place as to the pecuniary compensation of patrons: owing to the trifling amount, and the stipendiary nature of clerical emoluments in Scotland, and the variable and uncertain restrictions to which the exercise of church patronage has at all times been subject in that country, it has never, in modern times, been regarded so absolutely in the light of private property as it is in England. In consequence of this circumstance, such compensation was never hinted at, or the church would at once have raised such out of the funds appropriated to her by the state. But this idea was disclaimed on all hands, so that the charge of robbing the patrons of their rights and privileges is unworthy the slightest credence.

Secondly. The Veto Act having been in operation five years, and being founded on the principles of the church of Scotland, as held by the majority of the supreme ecclesiastical court, and the said Act having been declared good by its very opposers, and valid by the Lord Chancellor and other law officers of the crown, so far as regards the respect it had to the statute concerning patronage, passed in Queen Anne's reign, it became the imperative duty of the church in regard to that respect for her functions, as the minister of Christ, to adhere rigidly to her decisions, and enforce them in despite of whatever opposition might be offered. And as the then existing government sanctioned the Acts of Assembly, it was as little as that court could expect, to see her acts carried into execution by that government. The vacillating disposition of the late government in regard to this most important question cannot be too highly condemned; they had the power and they used it not. They sanctioned the Act of Assembly, and never called it in question, thus giving their acquiescence to the deed, and this for five years, and not until it was called in question in a court of law did they deem it worthy even of their notice. They then delayed from day to day, allowing matters to get still worse, when one single act of theirs might, long ere this, have restored peace and harmony, where now there is hostility, little short of civil war. Lord Brougham declared against the church, but his decision is not standard on this point, seeing his Lordship has no Christianity to enable him to judge as a Christian, in a Christian cause. Lord Dunfermline is another of the Lords who spoke a great deal of vile nonsense on the case, and whose knowledge of the point was as limited as that of my Lord Brougham; both certainly trotted famously in the same harness. We are anxious to hear the absurdities they will communicate on the question in the ensuing session; no doubt there will be as many as in the previous one, for their Lordships appear to be

long to that class of men who, can only see one way, when they wish to see no other.

But whilst we cannot approve of the conduct of the whig government towards the establishment, we are afraid that much less cause we soon shall have to approve of the deeds of the present government. It is all very well for Dr. Cooke of Belfast, and others with him, to place confidence in Sir Robert Peel in the present case. Sir Robert may

be a warm friend of the Scotch church, he says so, and we believe him. But is there any one such an ignoramus as to suppose that Sir Robert can say and do as he pleases in the matter? Nothing of the sort, he must be guided by a Sir James Graham, a Lord Aberdeen, a Gladstone, and many others, known enemies of church reform, and determined opponents to the non-intrusion principles of the Scottish church. We therefore do not enjoy the sanguine hopes that are entertained as to an amicable settlement of the question by Sir Robert Peel. He may himself be favourably inclined to grant the wishes of the great majority of the Scottish church, but he must consult his party, and by their decision he must in a great measure be overruled. The "Watchman" a short time ago declared that it would be a bad omen of Sir Robert's future government, if he decided against the wishes of the Scotch church, and of that of the powerful Presbyterian party in Ireland. We go further than this, when we say that it is our earnest hope that should such be his decision, that the people of Scotland, and the Presbyterian party of Ireland should unite, in a political union, and bind themselves to overthrow that government, which has exerted its influence to overturn the church of their fathers, the glory of their native land. The church has been accused of rebellion and open defiance of the law of the land, in presuming to chastise her renegade and apostate members. But, those who make such assertions ought to study the constitution of Scotland, previous to setting forth opinions on a subject which they cannot have studied, if they have neglected the political law of that country. For it is a fundamental principle of the political constitution of Scotland, incorporated with the revolution settlement, and forming an unalterable condition of the union with England, that the whole internal government of the church, and her entire discipline over her members, belongs inherently, and of divine right, to the church, as a body distinct from the state, to be exercised freely by her, to the absolute exclusion of all secular control. At the same time, it is no less a portion of the Scottish constitution, that in regard to secular affairs, the power of government belongs absolutely to the state, to the total and unqualified exclusion of all ecclesi

astical interference. Therefore, the state has no right to interfere, save in regard to secular affairs, her jurisdiction not being within the province of things ecclesiastical; consequently, the meddling of the state in the spiritual affairs of the church, is a direct violation of the political constitution of Scotland, a violation of the treaty of union, and an interference which calls for the strongest and most decided opposition from every Scotsman. Let the church demand of government an explanation of the treaty of union, and they will then be able to discern whether or not the government recognises it, and according to such decision let steps be taken. If the treaty of union is broken, then we are no longer one with England, but an independent state, and shall have more reason than the Lord Mayor of Dublin himself, to demand a repeal of the union. England cannot maintain her power and glory without us, and if Ireland joins us in the demand where will England stand in the great European political balance of power? Let her look to it, the cry of repeal has not yet been raised in the North, but let the fact be known, that in direct violation of the treaty of union, England has dared to destroy the Scottish kirk, and break down the political constitution of Scotland, and the cry of repeal will ring from John o'Groats to the Tweed, and joining with Ireland in our demands for satisfaction, compel her to grant through force, that, which honourable feeling and a sense of justice failed to do.

If we peruse the proceedings of the church from the commencement of this struggle, we shall at once see, that she has acted in strict conformity with these fundamental and familiar principles of the constitution. She objected not to the decision of the law courts in regard to the Auchterarder case, but bowed to their verdict; and it was only when these courts attempted to compel her to set aside her ecclesiastical power, and recall her decrees, that she resisted the illegal, unconstitutional, and tyrannical stretch of authority. The law courts attempted to judge the supreme spiritual tribunal in matters spiritual belonging solely to her jurisdiction; and that Assembly has justly and rightly defended their sacred privileges. She has been accused of breaking the law. Our opinion is, that the fools who talk in such a manner know not what law is. There has been no causa cognita, judicial decision of the court of session; three judges only, out of thirteen, have had the actions before them, and even they have pronounced no judicial decision on the great question at issue. What cause then have the opponents of the church to charge her with breaking the law? What law has she broken? What judicial decision of the court of session has she not obeyed? Not

one; but yet these fools talk continually of the church breaking the law. How zealous they seem for the honour of the law; how upright does the law of the land appear in their sight; it is a thing in which there is neither spot nor blemish; nothing but purity, truth, justice, and uprightness, can they see in our iniquitous laws. Poor blind dolts; it were mercy to conceive you speak through ignorance, for if through hypocrisy, how black and dark must your stony hearts be. Let the cause be brought before the thirteen judges, let them judicially decide, then our opponents might have some grounds to work upon in opposition to the church, should such sentence be against her.

But, even supposing such a result, we have no hesitation in affirming that, the church would neglect that duty she owes to God and man, should she yield one iota of those principles and privileges, which are hers, both by divine and constitutional right. Throughout the contest, the church has, as yet, exhibited a conduct which, for generations to come, will redound to her glory and praise; whilst every day that passes, exhibits in the conduct of her opponents, everything which malice can devise against our glorious reforming church. She now stands arrayed against the power of this world, against the cold formality -the offspring of that dead Christianity, so prevalent amongst those embued with Erastian principles. The great, the learned, and powerful of this world, may be against her, but One is for her, against the thick bosses of whose buckler it were death to strive. Let her go on, then, in the glorious work of reformation; let the spirit of a Knox dwell in the heart of every individual member of her communion; let them not shrink, now that the storm howls, and desolation and destruction are threatened to all who oppose its progress; but let every such feeling and consideration be stifled, and, with confidence in the Rock of their salvation, hoist on high the banner of the cross, and cry, "Victory or death! Christ is to us all-even our portion for ever!" Let these feelings animate us all. Allow no lukewarmness-the inherent principle of Erastianism-to smother our Christian determination to stand by our church. Surely, Scotchmen require not to be taught, that from their church they have received every good, moral, and pious lesson which they possess. Surely, it does not require goading, to induce them to take up the cross, and follow Christ. Let them call to recollection the ages in which their forefathers fought and bled for the same great cause. Let them imagine the times when their ancestors met on the mountains and in the valleys, to preach Christ and him crucified. And call to their remembrance the fiery trials which they were forced to

endure, whilst they remained faithful to their sworn Head, even the God of Israel. They were buffeted, they were scourged, they endured the pains of fire, and lived in the holes and caves of the mountains, rather than yield one iota of principle in the great and glorious cause of genuine Christianity.

Are the brethren of this generation become ashamed of their forefathers? Have they now no glow of heart, when they hear of a Knox, a Melville, or a Wishart? If their native feelings still exist in their hearts, if they still determine, like their martyred ancestors, to stand by the cross, through good and through evil report, let them lose no time in declaring such to be their decision, and at once come forward, and enrolling themselves under the banners of the church, present such a determined front as shall most effectually prevent her enemies from encroaching within her sacred walls.

Scotchmen! your Zion is in danger! Forward to the rescue The time is nigh at hand-- yea, even at the door, when the British ministry must decide either for or against you. Show your strength, then: hide it not proclaim it from John o'Groats to Land's-end; and from Donaghadee to the most southern extremity of Erin's green isle, so that no mistake may occur no misrepresentations as to your real strength be allowed to be, by your enemies, whispered in the ears of government. But proclaim to all that Scotland sends forth her strength, her glory, and her chivalry to do battle for the church of the living God.

If ye desert your church in this her extremity, you give up your Bibles, your hopes, your faith, your all! You will cause a sound of joy to ring throughout the camps of Rome and the infidel; your names will be mentioned with a hissing and reproach; and your children's curse will rest upon you, because you preserved not for them the pure fountain of living waters, the everlasting hope of them and theirs for ever. Think, then, on these things. Support that portion of the press which advocates the glorious cause.

REPORT

Give no assistance to your opponents. Have no peace till the tranquillity of your Zion be restored; but, laying aside all political and worldly differences, unite as one man in the contest. Your enemies have done so. These children of the world and the flesh are wise in their generation. The tory, the whig, and the radical, have joined, (" Advertiser," "Observer," and "Scotsman,") they have laid aside all minor differences, and with good fellowship, and determined zeal, persecute your beloved church. Be ye also wise in your generation; baffle your enemies by the honesty of your cause, the union of your strength, coupled with the wiliness of the serpent. You have no ordinary opponents; they are the learned, the great, the rich, men who, in their hearts adore the gods of this world, and who would not hesitate, and actually do, directly crucify the Lord Christ, in his body the church, and put him to open shame.

Such, then, fellow-countrymen, are your opponents. Such are the men with whom you have to deal. It does, therefore, behove you to put on the armour of faith in Christ; his strength to make your strength, and his cause yours. And, as good soldiers are ready at all times to meet the foe, so should you, as the sworn soldiers of the Lord of Hosts, the Great Captain of your salvation, be up and ready, that, when the trumpet sounds the onslaught, ye may not have still to buckle on your armour. Give God the praise in all your actions. Pray for the abundant outpouring of his most Holy Spirit upon you, so that you may go forth rejoicing that the God of Israel is as your light in a dark place, and as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.

Now to Him who is able to preserve his church from danger, and to restore her to peace, and the means of spreading abroad his great salvation, to Him, in the spirit of supplication, for his divine aid and assistance, we would ascribe the power, the honour, the glory, and the praise, for ever and Amen.

ever.

OF THE NON-INTRUSION COMMITTEE ON THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH

GOVERNMENT.

DR. GORDON gave in the following report on the negotiations which had taken place with the government on the church question :

Report adopted by the Non-intrusion Committee, and submitted to the Commission of the General Assembly, Nov. 17, 1841. The committee, understanding that very

considerable anxiety prevails throughout the church in reference to their recent proceedings, avail themselves of this opportunity of making a report to the commission, for the information and satisfaction of the commission itself, as well as of the church at large.

Immediately on the formation of the present administration, the commissioners named by the commission in August last, with the sanction and concurrence of the

committee, prepared a memorial on the affairs of the church, and, by a deputation of their number, laid it before her Majesty's government. That memorial was courteously received, and is now before the public. No immediate or decisive answer on the part of government was asked or expected, the object being to recommend the case of the church to their favourable consideration.

In the mean time, by the intervention of certain friends of the government, desirous of a right adjustment of the affairs of the church, proposals were brought forward for the accommodation of differences, and the settlement of the great question now at issue. The negotiation which followed was not sought by the committee. It took place at the instance of other parties, acting, as the committee are assured, with the best intentions; and the precise formula, suggested as the basis of the negotiations, was framed by those parties, and submitted by them to the committee.

The proposals now referred to, were understood to proceed on the footing of a measure fully recognizing the principle of nonintrusion, in the sense now maintained by the church, as one which the church courts should be allowed to carry into effect, in every case, in the settlement of a minister, by having power, in every case, to reject a presentee on the mere ground of the continued dissent of the people. On this understanding they were received by the committee and considered by them; while, at the same time, the committee were informed that they were likely to be favourably entertained in highly influential quarters, and were assured that an adjustment on that basis might probably be obtained during the late session of parliament.

In these circumstances the committee felt a heavy responsibility lying upon them. Being themselves most desirous of a speedy settlement of the church's affairs, on any terms consistent with adherence to principle, they were aware that the same desire was strongly and universally felt by the church. They considered also that the general assembly, in 1840, had indicated their opinion that the church might submit to a measure which should "leave the church courts at liberty, in the exercise of their judicial functions, and on their own responsibility, to give effect to their own solemn convictions of duty, in refusing to intrude presentees on reclaiming congregations;" and which should

church could act, and expressly stating that this was the construction which they put upon the proposal, the committee, after as mature deliberation as the apparent urgency of the case and the shortness of the time allowed, felt themselves called upon to give an answer to the proposal, to the same effect, in substance, with the deliverance of the assembly now recited. But the committee, in their answer, were careful to explain that this was not such a mode of settlement as the church could ever propose as her own, or take the responsibility of recommending; that the settlement, in order to its being fully satisfactory, ought to proceed upon the principle of the Duke of Argyll's Bill, or on a recognition of the call; and that it was solely in consideration of the prospect held out of an immediate settlement being obtained, and in order to remove all cause of delay, so far as they were concerned, that the committee were led to give any opinionespecially on so short a notice-of a plan in many respects so inadequate and imperfect. While, however, they could not express approbation of the measure or commit the church to an acceptance of it, as a sufficient measure of non-intrusion, the committee specified the benefits which they thought it would confer, inasmuch as it would enable the office-bearers of the church to act according to their conscientious convictions of duty, without the risk of collision with the civil courts; benefits unquestionably so great as to render such a measure—especially if immediately granted-in so far a great boon to the church and to the country. Finally, the committee made it clearly understood, that if no immediate settlement could take place, the matter must be considered as entirely open; that the committee and the church would be bound in that case, to continue their strenuous efforts to obtain a measure in which they could more unreservedly acquiesce; and that they must be free to exercise their own discretion in judging at any future period of the present, or of any other proposal, according to the views of duty which a full consideration of it might suggest.

The committee have satisfaction in stating that these explanations, in regard to the position in which the matter now stands, in consequence of the above communications, seemed to be distinctly comprehended, and the propriety of them was fully acknowledged. They further think it right to say, that while they have no assurance from Her Majesty's government, of their being prepared to accede to the proposal, on which, as above explained, the negotiation was based, or of this being the plan which the government are to adopt, to the exclusion of other measures, or in preference to those mea