respectful attention? None. Why then should the public mind be awakened to suspicion, or be agitated about this matter, before it had been canvassed by the Society? If it be proper to accomplish objects of this nature in such a way, then may such members of the Presbyterian church as approve of the writer's views, find hereafter deep reason to regret, that they have sanctioned a principle which allows all their efforts to endow Seminaries of learning, classic or sacred, to be held up as objects of suspicion and of danger.

But I do believe, I may say that I know, that many, very many members of the Presbyterian church never will, and never can, approve either the reasoning and arguments of the Reviewer, or the method which he has chosen in order that they should be felt by the public. Est modus in rebus. A great concern like this should not be transacted by an appeal to popular feeling; above all, by an appeal which has its basis in a view of facts altogether imperfect, and in many respects entirely erroneous. As a friend of the A. E. Society, as a disinterested friend, I feel that this Society has reason to complain of such a proceeding; and, if I may judge of the sympathies of others who have read the Reviewer's remarks, I believe its friends will complain aloud, and far and wide too, that justice has not been done to the Society, and that it is not guilty of the mistakes laid to its charge, nor any more exposed to future dangers, than every Society and Seminary in the country, and throughout the world.

The Reviewer will, I trust, forgive the plainness of these remarks, after the plainness with which he has expressed his own views. That they are published to the world is the necessary result of his own Strictures having been published.

Whoever he may be, I honour his talents, and the warmth of his heart on the great and good cause; although I differ widely from him as to some facts, and some principles of reasoning. If any thing which I have said, bears hardly upon him, it results from necessity, not from choice. I could not help endeavoring to show the true results and bearing of his allegations and his reasonings; and if in doing this, there may now and then be something which presses hard, it is not because I wish it, but because the nature of the case demands it.

After all, the A. E. Society fear no canvassing either in public or in private. They exclaim, with one voice, 'If our cause cannot be sustained by an appeal to reason, and argument, and Christian principle, then let it go down!' That it can be sustained, I must fully believe; and I have here proffered my feeble aid, to assist in this great object. But I am most fully aware, that neither my aid, nor that of its present friends, will be adequate to accomplish and to secure all the important objects which it has in view. To God the Saviour, I would most sincerely, most devoutly commend it; and it is my earnest supplication, that the smiles of heaven may be continually afforded it; that all its benevolent measures may be blest; that its friends, and its opposers (if it should have any), may yet be united in rejoicing over it, as the happy instrument of turning many to righteousness; and that future generations may rise up, and call it blessed.

M. STUART.

REMARKS OF THE EDITORS

ON THE FOREGOING STRICTURES.

We insert the preceding Strictures, notwithstanding their length and severity, with the utmost readiness. Our object was to bring a subject, which we deem of vital importance, before the churches, with the desire, that it might be candidly and conscientiously considered. As we have no party nor sectarian objects to promote, we are desirous that every thing that can be said in behalf of the A. E. Society, may be fairly and fully presented. We have read these Strictures with the attention due to the subject, and to the source whence they come. We cannot consent, however, to allow them to come before our readers without making such remarks, as we deem necessary for our own justification, and for presenting the subject in its proper light.

The first point, to which we would call the attention of our readers, is the propriety of bringing this subject before the public. Our reasons for taking this course may be very briefly stated. We hold it to be an incontrovertible principle, that public discussion of public measures is essential to the well-being of any community, civil or religious. As this will not be doubted, we shall not argue the point, but simply show, that the course which we saw fit to pursue, is justifiable on this ground; and that, if the friends of the A. E. Society do not mean to put down all discussion, and all examination into its principles and measures, they have no just cause of complaint. What then is the state of the case? Here is a Society proposing for its object the responsible work of preparing young men for the ministry. In the prosecution of this object, it addresses itself to the Christian public for support; it urges its claims with zeal and constancy in every part of the country, not merely in the section where

it originated and where it is located, but within the bounds of the Presbyterian church, organizes societies in a large portion of our congregations, and bids fair, in a short time, to get the whole of this important business under its sole direction. Now, supposing that there are a number of men, or any one man, who conscientiously believes, that the plan of this society is injudicious, that its principles are of evil tendency, that its organization is peculiarly dangerous, is he to be debarred the privilege of saying so? Is the mere fact that others think differently, to prevent him from presenting, in a fair and Christian manner, his difficulties for the consideration of his fellow Christians? We trust not. We trust that the time is far distant, when any society will either wish, or be able, to prevent public discussion or public scrutiny. But it seems, that in this instance, it is regarded as matter of just complaint: not because the Society or its friends are afraid of public discussion, but because they consider, that the proper course for any such individual to pursue, would be to present his objections to the Society itself or its Board of Directors. We thought differently, and think so still, for the following reasons: 1. The appeal of the Society is to the Christian public; to the Christian public therefore belongs the right of judging of its merits; and to the Christian public should be addressed, in our judgment, all the arguments for or against it. 2. We had good reasons for believing, that our objections would produce no effect upon the minds of the Directors. We knew that they had often considered the subject, and had frequently expressed their confidence in the wisdom and excellence of their plans. Where then could be the use of presenting our objections to them? What good could reasonably have been anticipated from such a course? None at all, as the result has proved. The author of these Strictures, who, it may be presumed, speaks the feelings and views of the Board, differs from us entirely in opinion, pronounces our objections of no weight, and is far from supposing that the whole system of the Society should be revolutionized, in order to render it worthy of public confidence. We might, therefore, as well have placed our objections in the fire, as presented them to this Board. The same reasons, with nearly equal force, apply to the idea of bringing them before the Society itself. Its annual meetings, even those for business, are not suitable seasons for

the discussion of questions, which involve so many principles and have so many important bearings, immediate and remote. Besides, the only probable method of operating effectually on the minds either of the Board or of the Society, was to bring the matter before the public; to have the reasons for and against, fairly presented; and time given for mature deliberation. The Society could not change its plans, after all that it has said and done, unless a change had previously been wrought in public sentiment on the subject. Now supposing, with such prospects, in case of an appeal to the Society or its Directors, we conscientiously believe (which is in fact the case), that our objections are of deep and solemn weight; that they call for the serious attention of the churches, are we to be denied the privilege of speaking out? Never.

Besides, we knew that these objections, or the most important of them, had been presented again and again to some of the leading members of the Society without effect. It matters not whether the representations were made orally or in writing; the subject was thus brought up, and that too, not merely by those who stood aloof from the Society, but by its own members and friends, some objecting to one feature and some to another. The matter of permanent funds has been more than once strenuously urged on the attention of the excellent Secretary of the Society, without producing any alteration in his views. The whole plan of the loaning system has been objected to, and argued against formally without effect. Now we ask, under these circumstances what good could have been expected from doing what had virtually been done so often, and by so many individuals, before? We think none.

But finally, our object demanded that this appeal should be made to the Christian public. This object was to prevent those of our fellow Christians, who should think with us, when this subject was once fairly presented to their minds, from committing themselves in this business; and to effect if possible through public sentiment, (the only way in which it could be expected), a change in what we honestly consider the objectionable features in the Society. This is an object, which we are neither afraid, nor ashamed to avow, and which, thinking and feeling as we do, it was not only proper but our bounden duty to pursue. We object to this Society,