IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // (./ ^4' fc k -^ ^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 t 1^ 12.0 U 116 o>^ Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STRUT WEBSTER, NY. 14S80 (716) 873-4S03 ^ r<\^ V :\ \ <^%*^^ ^.> O^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical iVticroreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes tachniquas at bibliographiquas The institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ te meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6ti possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-^tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiquis ci-dessous. Coloured covers/ Couverture de coulaur □ D D D D D Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagie Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculAe Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couieur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couieur (i.e. autre qua blaue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couieur Bound with other material/ Ralii avec d'autres documents □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couieur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes ~~7\ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colories, tacheties ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages ditach^es r~T| Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du matiriel suppl^mentaire D D D Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrie peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion la long de la marge Intirteure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissant dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti film^as. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmentaires: n Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuiliet d'errata. une pelure. etc., ont it6 filmies dl nouveau de facon d obtanir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Cj document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X J 12X 16X »X 24X 28X 32X Th« copy filmed hmrm Hm b««n raproducad thanks to tha ganarosity of: Library of Parliament and the National Library of Canada L'axamplaira film* fut roproduit grAca i la ginirofliti da: La BibliotMquo du Parlement et la Bibliothique nationale du Canada Tha imagaa appajring hara ara tha bast quality possibia considaring tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spocifications. La. imagaa suivantaa ont 4ti raproduitaa avac la plua grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattati da l'axamplaira filmi. at an conformitA avac laa conditions du contrat da fllmaga. Original copias in printad papar covars ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- sion, or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copiaa ara fiimad baginning on tha first paga with a printad or iilustratad impraa- sion. end anding on tha last paga with a printad or iilustratad imprasaion. Laa axamplairaa originaux dont la couvartura on papiar av< imprimia sont filmis 9n commanpant par la pramiar plat at on tarminant soit par la damiAra paga qui comporta una smprainta d'Impraasion ou d'tllustration. soit par la sacond plat, saion la eaa. Tous laa autras sxamplairas originaux sont fiimAs an commanpant par la pramiAra paga qui comporta una smprainta d'Impraasion ou d'tllustration at an tarminant par la damiAro paga qui comporta una taila amprainta. Tha laat racordad frama on aach microficha shall contain tha symbol ^^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol ▼ (moaning "END"), whichavar appiiaa. Maps, plataa, charts, ate., may ba filmad at diffarant reduction ratioa. Thoaa too larga to ba antiraly ir '^idad in ona axpoaura ara filmad baginning in tha uppar laft hand comar. laft to right and top to bottom, aa many framas aa raquirad. Tha following diagrama illustrata tha mathod: Un dae symbolaa suivants apparaltra sur la damiAra imaga da chaqua microficha. salon la caa: la symbols -^ signifia "A SUIVRE". la symbols ▼ signifia "FIN". Laa cartas, pianchas. tableaux, ate. pauvant Atra filmAa i daa taux da reduction diffArants. Lorsqua la document eat trop grand pour itre roproduit en un saul clichA. il sst flimi & partir da I'angia supAriaur gauche, do gauche k droite. et do haut an baa. un prenant la nombre d'Imegee nAcessaire. '.aa diagrammes suivants illuatrant la mAthoda. 1 a t 1 1 S 4 • • ■^ i^/f'^ ^ii '-«^ REV. ROB^, CiUiiPBElX': ^•f:j; op "THE PRESBYTERUN CHUR<;h IN CANADA,",, UNFURLED '^'V. .'JttV- A. ■ 'V .•# . ^-- f*<; or >>v '*T»E >RESBYTKpAlr;t;HORCH OF CANADA tN CONNECrtOX-WWH THE CHURSH OF SCCiTLANa- -*♦♦' /h?^ »■-■.•-■ ■■ ■#^'-- - .:;^-ii i#a f.;?p "('/■- s .TS ir f^ fj ' ■r^'ir '^, ♦* :W,fUy.fv; J «.tH I, "A FLAG OF DISTRESS," BY REV. ROBERT CAMPBELL, oi " TKE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN CANADA," TJDSr:FTJE,LE D A PARTNER OF MESSRS. LANG, BDRNET & GO. "THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CANADA IN CONNEC- TION WITH THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND." H'i) Mfi Perhaps it may appear presumptuous to accept the challenge of a man of such reputed eminence as Mr. Robert Campbell, Minister of the St. Gabriel Church, Montreal, and at^empt to answer " The Pretensions Exposed of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., to be the Presbyterian Church of Canada in Connection with the Church of Scotland," recently issued by him, appar- ently to enlighten the darkness of the Anti-Unionists, whom he represents as grovelling in ignorance and error. It should be borne in mind, however, that were he ten times greater than he really is, that need not deter any man, who loves to know and to be guided by the truth, who is directed in his actions by reason and matter of fact, if he finds thai the arguments ad- vanced, «nd the facts stated by Mr. Campbell are altogether different from those that govern him, he surely may state them without being deemed presumptuous. Truths and facts are happily independent alike of the greatness or of the littleness of men. We are perfectly willing to abide by the facts and evidence of the -case, and we are fully convinced that the stand- point from which we view the controversy admits of a satisfac- tory demonstration to all readers who may be willing sincerely and candidly to weigh the evidence which we are able to adduce. The Anti-Unionists are styled "a small and curious fra- ternity." " Some of tliem, wlio have no perception of order, and who make their own sweet will a law unto them " — " minister- ing to the humour of ' the winter of their discontent ' " — " rem- nant " — " that rebelled against its constitutional decisions " — " whom the Anti-Union leaders had r" eluded " — " shameiessness and folly " — "greater absurdity and evil intention " — " malicious rascality " — " contemptible trick, the atrociousness of which is only equalled by its impotency " — " this sample " — " Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co." Such are a few of the choice epithets used by Mr. Eobert Campbell in the few first pages of his bro- chure. Headers might imagine that the individual laying claim to the privilege of applying such language to the conduct of others, must of necessity be a man of pre-eminent spirituality and Christian charity. His character, however, may be best known by his actions. This Mr. llobert Campbell, when a student, assailed a partner of the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co. in the most violent miinner, in the public prints of the Province, and affirmed over his no7ii de plume that he (the partner) was the author of certain letters which had appeared to the detriment of Queen's College, Kingston. At the last Synodical Comnmnion of the Church, the party thus unjustifiably attacked by Mr. Robert (.Jampbell appealed to his sense of duty, and entreated him l.)efore he partook of the elements to make what amends was in his power by expressing his regret. Evidence was volunteered in the shape of certain MSS. in Mr. Robert Campbell's handwriting of the truth of the position assumed by the partner of Lang, Burnet & Co. Solemn asseverations were made to a fiiend of Mr. llobert Campbell that there was no truth in the gentleman's allegations. Header ■ you have concluded the amende honorahlc was made. Not a bit of it. This same purist is still at his loved work — detraction, attempt- ing to lower in public estimate a brother clergyman labouring with him in Christ's cause in the same city, and writing, pub- lishing and circulating a pamphlet in regard to others that can be productive of evil and no good. This Mr. Robert Campbell is the same individual who in liis new-born zeal for the new churcli into which lie has entered, tried to filch from i \i i ^ the lawful owners the property belonging to the Panet-street mission. It is exceedingly becoming, is it not, in a gentleman of this stamp to set himself up as the censor of the actions of others ? We are much mistaken if the members of the church to which he now belongs do not place the right esti- mate on liis pamphleteering effort. The friend of his, who wisely- uttered, " Is it worth the powder and shot ? " was not unlikely a clever agent, or scliemer, who took this cpiiet means to pre- vent Mr. Robert Campbell making a spectacle of himself. (Pro- verbs, xxvii., 22nd verse). Mr. Robert Campbell is evidently greatly distressed that " the small and curious fraternity " should claim to be the Pres- byterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland. He is savage at the audacity of Lang, Burnet & Co. arrogating to themselves this honored name, but, with curious inconsistency, he belabors with his praise the rest : the small number of persons in Ontario and Quebec who have chosen to take sides with them. " Not a disrespectful word has he to say " of them. Oh ! no. His sole regret is that they, too, had not followed the multitude, and looked up to " the trusted guides " of the Church. The public press of the land comes in for his animadversion. He deprecates sorely such designation being given to the minority, and went out of his way on a recent occasion, when the Press forgot itself, and gave them the right cue. The benighted Press, alas ! " are not supposed to be so familiar with the constitutional practices and rights of Presbyterian Churches as to be able to determine between the contending parties" — Mr. Robert Campbell, Minister of St. Gabriel Church, Montreal, alone being able to do this. Mr. Robert Campbell draws upon his imagination for his facts when he affirms that Lang, Burnet & Co. have been insti- tuting sh(im law suits, by way of pretending to claim the property as well as the 7iame of the Church. Acts of Parlia- ment, the pamphleteer assures us, carefully drawn, are not so easily overturned. He says the judgments against the min- ority, ought also to have satisfied the people that they were grossly deceived. How odd that the people supporting the views of the minority will not listen to Mr. Robert Campbell's logic and arguments. How odd ! A pretty touch he gives, and attempts to draw a bow at a venture, wlien he adds : " They should now take heart of grace, and abandon a cause that can only entail upon them hopeless burdens and disappointments. " What these are we are not aware, — we have yet to learn that our Anti-Tnion people have grumbled for any burden — have regretted any disappointment. The only burden that they regret is that their property should be wrenched from the Church of their fathers, and that tbey too long put trust in the sincerity and upright dealings of those who called themselves by the name of tlio Lord Jesus. The Expositor of the Pretensions of Lang, Jiurnet & Co. flies off at a tangent, and berates the firm for aspersing the good name of Dr. Snodgrass. Calls their recent action a contemptible trick, the atrociousness of which was only equalled by its impotency. The tailors of Tooley Street are evoked to shed lustre on the paper of the pamphleteer and to help him to utter hh mirth-provoking sentences at the malicious rascality of the tirm. The climax is capped in hear- ing Mr. llobert Campbell stand up for the credit of the parent Church, " for whose good name I have inherited from my fathers a chivalrous regard." Singular exhibition of it truly. Credit of the pai'ent Church! — ashamed of her time-honored nauiC, and lends a liand to blot it out. " Chivalrous regard from my fathers." Bah ! The chivalry which plays into the hand of the enemy, and which delivers up the fortresses and bulwarks of the Church to the keeping of hostiles. Mr. Kobert Campbell says : " It would be doing violence to ecclesiastical regularity,to the Legislatures and Courts of Canada, and to the past history of I'resbyterianism in the Dominion, to concede to Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., that they are the right and lawful continuation of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland." Again, — " The Presbyterian Church in Canada" now is legally and constitutionally the " Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the (.'hurch of Scotland." " The name alone is changed.' The M\[)OHitor of tlie Pretensions, we fear, exposes his own ignorance both of law and usage when he affirms that { J 4 the name is aloue changed. This is an admission of the just claim of the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co., to their designation. A change of name is a fundamental cliange of the Constitution of the body, and of the terms on which it was formed and by which it is known. How would Mr. Robert Campbell like the alias of Mr. Roger Clinkscales ? There is no provision in the polity of the Church for the change of name, and its change is tantamount to its dissolution. By a change of name you change the body ; therefore, the Presbyterian Church in Canada is not the same as the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. The Expositor says : " But the latter was ' merged ' with the former." Merged means swal- lowed up — as some of the Ministers of the former Church have reason to know, to their bitter experience — in the Union Church. As a matter of fact, it is affirmed, the propriety of changing the name of that Church was seriously proposed and discussed in 1844. This is a confounding of things that differ. Mr. Robert Campbell's present Union colleagues proposed such a change, but such proposal proceeded from Free Church men then, and from weak-kneed brethren of the Kirk to catch by a sop the Cerberus of Anti-Church of Scotlandism. A protest, which Mr. Robert Campbell thinks it prudent to ignore, was made by the late lamented Dr. Mathieson, which put a termina- tion to the controversy for a change of name. Our Expositor reiterates : " The Synod resolved by an overwhelming majority to change its name." It would be in vain for a junior member of the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co., to attempt to correct Mr. Robert Campbell's views on this point, and to assure him tliat no cir- cumstance but unanimity can accomplish such a change as that referred to. It may he yet, on appeal, tliat any one — not to speak of Mr. Robert Campbell's contemptible corporal's guard of Anti-Unionists— can lay claim both to name and property. Various decisions in this country have been made on this prin- ciple, and we have yet to learn that there is one exception to it in the judicial decisions of tlie Court of Session or Privy Council. It is added by the pamphleteer, however, that the change was sanctioned by the Legislature of Ontario. What a fabrica- ■■■I tion of only a part of the trutli. A suppression of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, is worse than a downright falsehoud. The second clause of 38 Vic, Cap. Ixxv, declares : " Provided always that if any congregation in connec- tion or in couinmiiion with any of the said Churches, shall, at a meeting of the said congregation, regularly called according to the Constitution of the said congregation or the practice of the Church with which it is connected, and held within six months after the said union takes place, decide by a majority of the votes of those who, by the Constitution of the said congre- gation or the practice of the said Church with which it is con- nected are entitled to vote at such a meeting, determine not to enter into the said union, but to dissent therefrom, then, in such case, the congregational property of the said congregation shall remain unaffected by this Act, or by any of the provisions thereof." If such proviso as the foregoing does not provide for the continuance of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connec- tion with the Church of Scotland, we have lost our skill. Moreover, it may l)e unknown to Mr. Robert Campbell, for it cannot be expected that he should know everything. Honourable Judges on che Bench have given their decision as this being the real effect of the second section of 38 Vic, Cap. Ixxv., and also of 38 Vic, Cap. Ixii., Quebec. The section guarantees the con- tinuation of the old name and Constitution, Mr. Robert Camp- bell, the Expositor, notwithstanding. A great flourish is made about an unworthy resolution of our Synod admitting holus bolus whole denominations to all the rights, status and privileges of our Church. As a case in point, the minutes of Synod are quoted, and the assertion made that almost every year the incorporating of clergymen into itself took place, exception being taken to some utterances of Mr. Robert Burnet as reported in the Montreal Weekly Herald, 19th June, 1875. We have only to remark on such admissions by acclamations, that such parties have been first and foremost to second such views as are held by the expositor of Lang, Burnet & Co. 'a pre- tensions, and the first to show by their actions that with them i it was a matter of little difference whether they served in one church or in another. Probably their having been already in many church connections rendered it facile to jump from one into another. Mr. Kobert Campbell is singularly unfortunate in quoting Minutes of Synod, 1882, i)age 32, and in asserting that such action was a precedent for tlu^ foolish resolution of LSTH, page 35. In 1832 the Synod resolved that " the ministers of the United Synod of Upper Canada produce the extracts of their ordination to the Presbyteries of this (Jhurch, * * * and that they, together with the sessions, or the representatives of their respective congregations, shall declare their adherence to the standards of the Church of Scotland, as to doctrine, disci- pline, government and worship." Such instructions were forwarded to the members of the United Synod of Upper Canada. We stand corrected if such expressions can be construed as Mr. Robert Campbell has done " with their congregations in a hody.'" The Expositor of the Pretensions mnst have imagined the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co., very unsophisticated to think to lead them to believe that there is a parallelism between the cases of 1832 and of 1875. The resolution of 1875 declares " that ihe United Church shall be considered identical with the Presb} terian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland." Now, our im- pression is that no resolution of anybody, cleric or laic, could mak§ things that differ identical. The Church to which we (the firm) belong is governed by Kirk Sessions, Presbyteries and Synods. The admitted Church was governed by Kirk Sessions, Synods and Assemblies. The order was different, the govern- ment different ; parties, by the resolution, were admitted to our Church who had no business there, who had not sought admit- tance, and who differed essentially in many important theo- logical views from the constitutional principles of our Church. Mr. Robert Campbell admits that his memory is not just of the best. Let me remind him of the returns to the remit on union : — 8 Presbyteries vote yea. 3 send no return. 8 •SO Kirk Sessions vote yen. 12 " " " nay. 4() send no return. 95 Congregations vote yea. 10 " " nay. 45 " send no return. The strength of the minority is something more than a corporal's guard. We can with truth affirm that the dissatis- faction is increasing. Instead of the harmony that was pro- phesied, bitter feuds have arisen in the congregations professedly in the union. The Kirk men and the Free men, in the Presby- teries, are as distinct as ever they were. The Assembly at Halifax was shamefully packed — admittedly packed. A near approach was made to a second departure on the Macdonell heresy of the limited liability scheme, and the overture from the Paris Presbytery foi removing Queen's College, Kingston, to Toronto. Dr. Jenkins assumed the office of head-pacificator and general confessor, and prayers and tears plenteously fol- lowed, with a jointure in prospect ot the Eev. Doctor of St. Paul's being hoisted into a Professor's chair. A nos movions. It is gravely affirmed in order to overthrow the pretensions of Lang, Burnet & Co., that an extra-coiistitutional precaution was taken to make the spoliation of property and the disposal of our honoured name legal ; sent down to congre- gations, forsooth. Who ever heard, but the Expositor and such like him, of an extra constitutional precaution ? Such a' prin- ciple does not exist in any church, far less in the Presbyterian. Extra precaution, indeed ! To the right thinking and sober members of all the churclies, such test will carry with it its own condemnation — a breach of constitutional action. No man, no body of men, can by any pretended resolution of a majority of a church court, make wrong right. Presbyterianism knows only of the congro^'-ation through its representative, the Kirk Ses- sion. The chicanery, jugglery, mean, contemptible action practised by certain ministers of union proclivities, in carrying out the union, merit the reprobation of all righL-thiuking men. In some cases the merest liandful of people voted away and bartered, at the bidding of their clerical superiors, the blood- 1' bought birthrights of God's people, and shamelessly trafficked in the best interests of our congregations. Revelations, startling yet true, remain to be made of the nanner our people were led to the slaughter house— the Victoria Skating Eink. The corporal's guard that continued the session of the Synod in St. Paul's, Montreal, on the 15th June, 1875, represented the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. No one present of their number, nor any of the seceders questioned the quorum. The diet of the morning was continued under the aegis of a notarial protest, which the Clerk of the Synod has omitted to embody, or even to mention in the printed minutes. In reference to a quorum of Synod, the Expositor is invited to turn to the minutes of Synod 1831, and he will there find how many ministers constituted the Synod at its initiation. Eleven ministers, all told, and two elders. Mr. Eobert Campbell's logic and argument is, eleven ministers and two elders can constitute a Synod, but fifteen is the least number to carry it on— the wonder is that the versa- tility of his talent did not evoke the law ex necessitate. But like many Expositors, he gets befogged when dealing with con- stitutional principles. In 1832, (see minutes. Session ii.. Diet i.) six ministerial members and two elders constituted the quorum, and main- tained their right to do so. On the following morning, Diet ii., ten ministers and two f-lders formed and constituted the Court. Mr. Robert Campbell does not perceive tiie relevancy of these precedents. No ! They don't suit him. "No opposition was offered by the minority to the adjourn- ment on the 15th June, 1875." The effrontery of this state- ment is consummate in the light of the facts. The coolness of this statement is only matched by the deafness of the late Clerk of Synod, Mr. John H. McKerras, who on oath declared he did not hear the notarial protest read, and therefore did not record it, because the Court took no action upon it. No, but the Coi.rt took action in oppo.sition to it, and the contention is, by the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co., that they were thereby ftssoiled from the action of the majority. They claim, therefore, IB! mm TO and by right, to he and to remain, the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. Will it be believed that this constitutional stickler, Mr. Kobert Campbell, seeks for confirmation of his views from minutes, with regard to which the following note is appended to the printed record : — No roll of the Synod appears to have been preserved, hith- erto, either in the written record or in print. The attempt to disprove Lang, Burnet & Co.'s claim from minutes thus carelessly kept carries with it its own refutation. No need for even the junior member of the firm to further " unfurl " the straits to which Mv, Campbell is put in the accomplishment of his futile effort. Comment is next made on the protest of the minority sub- mitted to the Synod, and recorded in the printed minutes, Montreal, 14th June, 1875. What force was there in it ? is asked. The answer by the Expositor is that " what a protest in such a case secures is only the easing of the conscience of the individual offering it, and the absolving of him from any legal consequences that might otherwise fall on him personally by the action of the majority, if he did not thus protect himself" We say, answered like a catechism — like a book. The dissen- tients protected themselves and meant to do so, not only against the then action of the Court, wliich they believed to be wholly illegal, and which tliey can demonstrate was illegal, but also against the high-handed and illegal action of the Court tliroughout. What are the facts ? The Synod that met in Ottawa on the 2nd of June, 1874, adjourned to meet in Toronto by the following Act : — " The Moderator then addressed the Synod, and said : In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the King and only Head of this Church, and in the name of this Synod, 1 declare this meeting to star I adjourned until the third day of November next, when tli( Synod will meet by adjournment at Toronto, and within St. Andrew's Church there, on the dav aforesaid at half-past seven o'clock p. m. Of which pul>lic intimation was made." udjjurnment at the the Moderator, de- ■ The Synod day and date. met in Toronto by Mr. John Iiannie, TI ■ Glared it to be a new Synod. A facile majority enabled him to carry his point. When it was moved, however, that this Synod now proceed to the election of a Moderator, this same Mr. Rannie, blowing hot and cold, declared the motion incompetent, and again was sustained by a rampant majority- The Expositor's view on this point is correct. We are glad to give credit where it is due, and more especially as such oppor- tunity has been so limited in the unfurling of Mr. Robert Campbell's flag of distress. '' So long as the majority only do such things as constitutionally lie within their power, 'All is right, ' is his motto. Special appeals of a sophistical nature will not avail Mr. Robert Campbell here. We questioned the constitutionality of such action. We say it is indefensible. The law of the Church says, that representative Elders shall be chosen within two months after the rising of the Synod. As a matter of fact, Kirk Sessions proceeded to elect their representatives, and these representatives thus chosen consti- tuted the membership of the Synod at Toronto on the 3rd of November, 1874; and, strange to tell, but not less true, the same constituency thus and then chosen made up the constituency at Montreal on the 8th of June, 1875. To vary the phrase, to enable our able Expositor to look on this side and then on that, there was no legal election of Elders for tlie June meeting of Synod in 1875 at all. See Presbytery minutes as produced in the Bayfield case by the unwilling witness, Rev. J. H. Mc- Kerras, Clerk of Synod. To hear Mr. Robert Campbell prate about tlie 2}<'rsonnel, whatever that means, of the members of Synod, is very pro- vocative of saying bad words and thinking uncharitable thoughts. There are, however, crumbs of comfort even to such daring men as compose the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co. Mr. Rannie, who betrayed his church and who sacrificed his church privileges, was hastily nsmoved from the scene of his labors aTid relegated to the mild regions of British (imam. Mr. James Croil, agent for the schemes, and who ably aided and abetted the schemers, has been eased of his responsibility in issuing to the world poetical effusions on the limited liability schemes of cer- tain Canadian theologians. The Very Rev. Principal Snodgiass I 12 has betaken himself to the rich and fattening pastures of a parish kirk in Scotland, squeezed out of his office and position by the too pressing public opinion of a hostile and dominant majority. Public rumour goes even to affirm that Mr. Robert Campbell, Expositor of the Pretensions of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., is not very secure in his saddle. Others have been obliged to hide their light in the Far West How could it otherwise be ? A minister of God's Gospel, which breathes love and good will to all, venturing to exhibit his Christianity in accusations of the brethren that so recently sat with him in the same church courts, and engaged in the same work, publicly and glaringly, in outrageously anti-Christian apostrophes — " The preposterousness of their claiming to be the true representatives of the Church of Scotland in Canada cannot but provoke mirth ! The venerable parent Church might well say ' Save me from my friends.' " " If they were set out in a row for l^er inspection, she would have little cause to feel flattered by those who give themselves fortli as her sole cliampions among us. The bitterest enemy the Church of Scotland has could not desire any worse thing to befall her than that she should be judged of by this sample." " If those men loved the Mother Church with anything like the devotion they pretend to, they would blush for sliame to think that her strength and worth sliould be estimated by the sliow they are able to make on her behalf, and would hide themselves from public view, instead of parading their weakness before the world." Wonder who may, that an individual so left to himself to rave in this fashion about men who were recently his equals — on a par with him — sitting in the same Church Courts — and now, because, forsooth, they dare to differ in their views of ecclesiastical duty, held up by him to jmblic ridicule and scorn. If all was known and all was told, it would be found that the men of our Synod, who liavo bartered their birthright and sold, by their recreancy, their Church, stink in the nostrils of many of tliose with whom they have cast in tlieir lot. The minority are not to be judged of from Mr. Robert Campbell's standpoint. The firm might, appropriately enough, (juote for his instruction : " Judge not that ye be not judged." The minority seek no ' ■ ' i ' >l 13 man's goods ; they try to coerce no man's conscience ; they are quite satisfied that Mr. Eobert Campbell has gone his way. They seek no worldly aggrandizement ; they are not flaunting their pretensions, like a red flag, in tlie sight of the gentleman who signs himself Minister of St. Gabriel Church ; they seek, and have sought, no controversy with him, but when, as he says, the time has come for him to utter his common-places, sophis- tries and untruths, it then is our turn to tell him, and tell the Churches and our Canadian fellow citizens, especially our attached laity, that we mean simply to assert our rights — rights, handed down to us, and which we have determined, with all the tenacity of our natures, to hand down unimpaired to our suc- cessors. Ho speaks of his chivalry in regard to the Church of Scot- land. Can Mr. Eobert Campbell give Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., any statement as to the truth of the rumor that chivalrous members of the Union Church show their devotion to the Church of their fathers by signing themselves twice a year " Ministers of the Church of Scotland," when the regard is, probably, towards the coming dividend. We are well aware that the funds of the Temporalities Board were intended for such Ministers. Our memory, of which we have nothing to complain, recalls the fact that we were consulted as to the terms on which we v/ould sur- render Clergy Keserve Funds, and the conditions run in the following words : " To join all sums so obtained into one Fund, which shall be held by them till the next meeting of Synod, by which all further regulations shall be made; the following, however, to be a fundamental principle, which it shall not be competent for the Synod at any time to alter, unless with the consent of the Ministers -granting such power and authority : That the interest of the Fund shall bo devoted, in the flrst instance, to the payment of £112 10s. each, and that the next claim to be settled, if the Fund shall admit, and as soon as it shall admit of it, to the £112 10s., be that of the Ministers now on the Synod's roll, and who have been put on the Synod's roll since 9th May, 1858 ; and also, that it shall be considered a fundamental principle that all persons who have a claim to such boneflts shall be ministevs of (he rre.sl)yterian Church of H Canada in connection with the church of Scotland, and that they shall cease to have any claim on, or be entitled to, any share of said commutation whenever they shall cease to be Ministers in connection with the said Church." Like certain postscripts, the pith is in the latter clause. Dr. Cook enunciated in his resolution at Ottawa, principles of spoli- ation and revolution. His v.ords are, and they are also the judg- ment of the Synod : " llesolve to alter the proposed disposal of the Temporalities Fund, and to change the resolution in the former Remit anent the said Fund." He would only leave the Churcli of Scotland, he declared, when he got the funds with him. What the Firm charge is, that the Very Eev. Principal Snodgrass, after he became Principal of Queen's College, at Kingston, and before his advent to power, used his every art and artifice to get the primary disposition of the Fund changed, and seconded every effort to destroy and secularize the nucleus of a Fund for the permanent endowment of the Church. His nos- trums appear in the acts and proceedings of the Synod ; they are recorded there. It ought to be added that Mr. Robert Campbell, Exposer of the Pretensions of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., from a different standpoint, however, was continually harping in the Synod about his rights to a larger share in the Fund. No one present at the meeting of Synod in 1875, and even in former years, but must remember how glibly he spoke of the Synod being the heir of the funds of the Temporalities Board. The Firm trust to show that in a sense this is the case, though quite contrary to Mr. Robert Campbell's views, and in a way which may probably cause him to make a wry face. Our contention is tliat tliese funds became the property of the Pres- byterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland, and only on account of such connection. That the commuting ministers never have, and wh-dt is to the point, never could, give permission to alter the disposition of the trust ; that previously to the Union no allegation was ever made that the Fund was not properly administered, with the exceptions already mentioned — Mr. Robert Campbell and Principal Snodgrass. That a new disposition has been made of these funds — that the benoiiciaries do not Ijolong to the I'resbyturian Church of Can- i5 ada in connection with the Church of Canada, but to a hostile Church, styled and known at law as the " Presbyterian Church in Canada" — that at the present moment the funds are not being administered according to the intent of the donors, and tliat, therefore, we who adhere to the doctrine, government and worship of the Church of Scotland, however small and insigni- ficant we may be, have a just and legal claim both to administer and reap the advantages of the Fund. During the expiring moments of the Synod, almost at its death-throe, what will honest and constitutional members of the stamp of Mr. Robert Campbell say to the generous act of the Synod in granting out of the Temporalities Board Fund a yearly sum of $850 (eight hundred and fifty dollars) to Morrin Col- lege ? This on the 14th day of June, 1875. When men get their consciences screwed up to swerve from truth and recti- tude, there is really no limit to the violation of right and con- stitutional law. Mr. Eobert Campbell legalizes all by the expression— Done by the majority. Subservient Boards of Trust may introduce, through those conniving at it, By-laws to enable them to perpetrate illegalities in a legal manner; but that does not make the act legal and honest for all that. Much is said to disprove the claim of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., being the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland, by citing the case of the Church in 1844. The seceders in 1844 desired the accomplishment of two things ; first, that the connection of t\, j Church of Scot- land should terminate; and second, that the Synod should alter its designation. By their action they accomplished both objects. They constituted themselves the Presbyterian Church of Canada, struck out for themselves, and became, according to Mr. Robert Campbell's views, schismatics. They resisted the will and decision of the majority. Now the majority went out and constituted themselves the Presbyterian Church in Canada, and that Church is not hi connection with the Church of Scot- land. Mr. Robert Campbell will surely permit us to differ from him in opinion. He belongs to the Union Church, the firm do not. He cannot belong to both, that's certain. We belong to the old Church— have faithfully, as far as v\ e know how, carried i6 out her principles, and still ilesire to do so. This exposer of the pretensions of the firm reiterates again and again that we are finding fault with the Free Church ; we repudiate the asper- sion. Our contention is that the Free Church, or those repre- senting that body, laid on our table a protest accusing the Church of all manner of abominations, and that to this day that protest has not been withdrawn. Mr. Hubert Campbell turns a sharp corner, and at once de- clares that the Presbyterian Church of Canada is not the Free Church — that the Church is composed of two bodies — and that, therefore, no representative exists to lift the protest. We reply : That in the published principles of the second body, which went to compose the Presbyterian Church of Canada, the Church of Scotland is styled a sinful Church, cause sufficient, we would have thought, for Mr. Eobert Campbell not seeking a closer inti- macy than he had with that Church. It is exceedingly difficult, however, to meet the contending views of our Unionists. Prof. McKerras, on oath, declares that he never was a Minister of the Church of Scotland, that our Church here never had, and has not now, any connection with the Church of Scotland. Ignoring, as his co-Unionist Mr. Robert Campbell does, that there is a definable connection. It is a connection, 1st, ot descent ; 2nd, of adherence to the same standards ; 3rd, of friendly intercourse, ministerial communion and Christian fellowship. We cannot give up the first. The Union body has given up the second. The Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland represents the Church of Scotland in her standards, doctrines, worship, discipline and government. To all this, and to the connection in all this, the members of our Synod cleave with their whole heart. How changed from all this the position of the Union Church I Tlie gloss put upon the standards being, " It beinpf distinctly understood that nothing contained in the aforesaid confession or catechism, regarding the power and duty of the civil magistrate, shall be held to sanction any principles or views inconsistent with full liberty of conscience in matters of religion." We tenaciously hold to the third — it is the palladium of our rights. In ISoo, Minutes of Synod, (3th August, a funda- 17 < » mental item of our Church's Constitution is, " That a standing committee shall be naniod by the General Assembly to corres- pond with such churches in the colonies, for the purpose of giving advice on any question with regard to which they may choose to consult the Church of Scotland, and affording them such aid as it may be in the power of the comtnittee to give, ia all matters affecting their rights and interests." We have, and claim the right that this fundamental principle of -iir ecclesias- tical Constitution gives us to approach the Church of Scotland. This Mr. Robert Campbell, the Exposer of the Pretensions of Lang, Burnet & Co., has waived. He has resiled from that posi- tion, another change by the Union which is certainly not in favor of the claims of Mr. Robert Campbell ])eing regarded as the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. What becomes of his Christian charity when he says : " It ought to be pretty clear that the people in the Mother Country should give no funds to ' the Seceders ' as an organized Church." Let our people rejoice that, amid much that has handicapped us as a Church, the Church of Scotland has not forgotten to hold her old relations to the Church of Scotland in this Colony, but lias generously administered to our need when deprived of our property, and has enabled us to maintain in the mission field four earnest and dilii^ent mission- aries. What we want is another pampldet or two from Mr. Robert Campbell, St Gab., Montreal ; a few more cases of the Snod- grass stamp — somersaults enabling him and others to vault into pleasant retreats in Scotland, and theu the people of the Mother Church will begin to understand who her friends are in the Dominion of Canada — those guilty of loud-mouthed bragga- docio, or those who, holding on the quiet tenor of their way, desire to discharge their duty in that sphere in which it has pleaded God to place them. In the discharge of that duty the Synod of 1877 took into their consideration an overture anent seceding ministers. " There was presented through the Com- mittee on Bills and Overtures, an overture I'rom the Presbytery of Glengarry, craving the Synod to call over the names of the Ministers who have withdrawn from this Church, who joined the Presbyterian Church in Canada at the Victoria Skating \ i8 Eink ; to declare theDi to be no longer Ministers of this Church, and depose them from the office of the Ministry. Whereupon, the Synod declaied, as they hereby do declare, that these Minis- ters wlio have joined the Presbyterian Church in Canada, thereby seceding from the Synod, viz : * * * ****** are no longer ministers of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland, or of the Church of Scotland in Canada, and that they are hereby deposed from the ministry of said Cliurch. Further, the Synod agree to record the expression of the grief of the members present at reading the names seriatim, and at declaring those who have seceded from our Church no longer ministers thereof, in terms of chap- ter vi., section 1, of the Polity of this Church, and after the example of the Synod of 1844, chap, vi., of cases without process. 1. — When an individual commits an offence in the presence of the Court, or when he voluntarily confesses his guilt, it is competent to the Court to proceed to judgment without pro- cess, the offender having the privilege of being heard. The record must show the nature of the offence, the judgment of the Court and the reasons thereof" See Acts and Proceedings of Synod, Montreal, Monday, September 23rd, 1844. No way was left for us but to protect our rights, and proceed to the deposition of men who had broken their vows in having promised to follow no division courses in regard to the Church. Mr. Eobert Campbell may no longer speculate as to the manner the Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland have dealt with the seceding brethren. We very briefly settle the point on which Mr. Robert Camp- bell, with his acute logical powers, attempts to place the Church on the horns of a dilemma by being either too quick or too slow in organizing the Synod after the new departure of the Unionists to the Skating Eink. The Church did not cease to exist, though the brethren had not constituted at all. As long as one member stands by the principles of the Church, such an one has a claim at law, and both in this and in the old country 19 has such a claim been recognized. Any amount of supposed shps on the part of the general of the opposition did not in- validate the succession one whit. The Union Acts, Loth of Quebec and Ontario, took care of the stripped and deserted Church. .f i Ex cathedra, however, we are informed by the Expositor of the Pretensions of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., " That there were only two points at which a dissent from union proposals and a protest against them could be made with any show of propriety." Fancy this being said with such downright gravity as to startle the weak nerves of poor mortals like those of the junior member of the firm of Lang, Burnet & Co. In our innocence we imagined that a dissent or protest can be made by any member of court at every new decision come to by the house on any question, if relevant and courteously expressed. We must enter the new school of Mr. Eobert Campbell and learn of him, and take kindly to his manner of stating things. The coolness, not to use the adjective from which the noun is derived, and append to it a nominal exple- tive—the coolness of Mr. Robert Campbell in his statements excites our curiosity, but not our wonder. We have known him for some time past, though we have scrupulously avoided inti- macy or imitation. If Mr. Robert Campbell honors the junior member of the firm he exposes in his " Flag of Distress." eclypt, " The Pre- tensions Exposed of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co. to be the Pres- byterian Church of Canada in Connection- with the Church of Scotland," we would direct his attention to the law of the Church of Scotland ; 1697, enacted " That before a General Assembly of this Church pass any acts which are to be binding rules and constitutions to the Church, the same acts be first proposed as overtures to the Assembly; and being by them passed as such, be remitted to the consideration of the several Presbyteries of this Church, and their opinions and consent re- ported by their commissioners to the next Assembly following, who may then pass the same into acts, if the more general opinion of the Church, thus had, agree thereto." Act 9. It is admitted that a Remit on Union was sent down to 20 Presbyteries in terms of the Barrier Act, and also to Sessions and congregations, with instructions to report thereon to an adjourned meeting of the Synod, to be held at Toronto, and within St. Andrew's there, on the third day of November, at half-past 7 o'clock p. m. This in direct violation of the Presby- terian government, established in 1560. A majority, however, makes it Constitutional. According to Mr. Eobert Campbell's showing, the Union Act was to become a permanent Constitu- tion of the Churcli, yet it is introduced to the notice of the Court by a private member. Dr. Jenkins (see minutes, Mon- treal, June 4, 1870) produced and read a letter addressed to him on The Incorporation of all the Presbyterian Churches in the Dominion under one General Assembly. [The Italics are not mine.] Such is the introduction of the Union question for the deliberation of the Synod of our Church. "Timeo Danaos dona ferentes." At every stage of the discussion of such a question, at every fresh development, any one differing from the tenor and progress of the cause, was justly entitled to dissent, or, if need be, protest. In fact, an overture subscribed by members of the congregation of Lindsay, setting forth the desirableness of a union with the Presbyterian Church, and craving the Synod to take steps in the premises, was submitted on the same day. " The Synod resolved that further action on the overture was unnecessary." Constitutionality was only a jewel in our Synod when it suited those wlio made their own sweet will a law unto them." At the triuniph of his own sublime argument in affirming that the introduction of a question to be enacted into a permanent and standing Constitution by private letter was equivalent to an overture, Mr. liobert Campbell rejoices that, notwithstand- ing this was the case, nobody was hurt — " it was all quiet along the Potomac " — and then he irreverently exclaims : " And for this Providence is to be thanked." Perhaps. Mr. Itobert Burnet's absurdity is noticed in offering reasons of dissent, as expressed on 8th June, 1874, minutes, page 34. Notwithstanding Mr. Eobert Campbell's animadversion, and learned disquisitions on overtures, &c., &c., we hold the reasons unanswered and unanswerable. " 21 The poser presented so cleverly to Mr. Robert Burnet on page 22 of the " Flag of Distress," is replied to in the following temis : I have had neither act nor part in the Union. Fre- quently, I do admit with deep regret, that my views were not so pronounced as they ought to have been, and this from defer- ence to the modified views of others — notably those of William Mitchell, Esq., and Thomas A. McLean, Esq. It may, perhaps, excite a shrug of the shoulders, but I fearlessly make the assertion that the compilers of the polity and some who make quotations from it, did not understand the excerpts which they were the innocent instruments of placing there. For example, Mr. Robert Campbell says, page 23, at the bottom : " The Synod is composed of all the members of all the Presbyteries within its bounds." The quotation is made to justify the declaration by the Moderator that the meeting of Synod at Toronto was the next following that at Ottawa. The real significance of the excerpt is, that it declares the kind of members which go to compose a Synod. The Session is made up of Elders and officiating Ministers, the Presbytery of Minis- ters and representative Elders. It may seem a small matter to notice, but we give a distinct denial to the statement on page 24, near the top, that " The Polity of the Church provided that the roll of the Presbytery could be revised at any meeting, pro re nata or otherwise, during the year. This is simply not the case. In respect to the representation of the Church at Toronto in November, 1874, the least said about that the bettor. It was notorious that large numbers stayed away, appalled by the sweeping changes in contemplation by the " trusted guides of the Church." II. It grieves and distresses Mr. Robert Campbell that Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co. have set themselves up in opposition to the Legislatures and Courts of Canada in persisting in maintaining that they are the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. It is sometimes a mistake to awaken the old echoes. Few of those who were admitted to the confidence of the ring that pulled the Union ropes but know that the union of the Presbvterian Churches was being forced on 22 these bodies by the wonderful inroads the Methodist churches were making upon their ranks, rolitics.too, h;id not a little to do with the matter. Flaming politicians in all tlie eluirches were agog at the gains they were to secure by the change ; nee ly politicians recently elevated, or lowered, as the case may be, from their former callings, were by tlu; force of circumstances called into power. Their former Church connections being of a rather nondescript kind, induced them to forward Union views to hide what some might justifiably call former defections, and thus the ball was kept rolling. Love of imitation in c^rrent political union of the Provinces cauglit the sympathy of some, and fancy of others Self-aggrandisement in a few cases was the predominant motive — comfortable berths for life, dearly earned by truckling sycophancy, swayed with one out of the three or four moving Union spirits on our side. Fears and hopes however, have been singularly in the ascendant in the past two years of the existence of the Union Church, and the Very Rev. Principal Snodgrass himself said to a friend of mine some months ago that he was sorry for the part he had taken in the Union. Other motives than those attributed by the Expositor to Lang, Burnet & Co., have swayed with the few but loyal ad- herents of the Church of Scotland. A tale might be unfolded in reference to the passage of the Acts of Parliament, as the Exposer says, " witiiout much hesi- tation, after due enquiry." In regard to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, it can be truthfully affirmed that the Hon. Mr. Eraser, C'hairman of the Private Bills Committee, was in such indecent haste that there was not time to make proper representation. The Bills before the House had been sent up to the Judges to make due enquiry ; they were suddenly recalled at the instance, we have been led to understand, of James Bethune, Esq., M. P. P., and styled charity bills, to facilitate their immediate passage through the Legislature. These Union Acts, Mr. llobert Campbell affirms, are carefully drawn after due en(|uiry. We have the opinion of an eminent jurist, that had it been the intention of the drawer to make them, more ambiguous than they are, it oould not have been done. At Quebec we believe the case was not much dif- I 23 1 ferent. The misconduct on that occasion of a Rev. Divine will for ever remain a blot on his otherwise fair escutcheon. Mr. Robert Campbell speaks again and again of our law- suits. Shams they are. He attributes to us motives in draw- ing our law pleas that never entered our minds. Amongst other things he says that the pleas of the unconstitutional acts of the Church were absurd. The gentleman does not seem to be aware that a matter can only be legally consummated which has been legally carried out by the Courts. We believe Judge Proudfoot's decision is altogether favorable to the views of the Anti-Unionists, and was decided on the ground that the House was seized of the Bills, and that therefore the case must be given against the pursuer, on the ground that the Parliament can do no wrong. The coLtention of the Fn-m is that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario cannot legislate for subjects out of its jurisdiction. In holding this opinion we do not surely abdicate our citizen- ship. Nay, on the contrary, we think we uphold it. We suffer abuse in order that we may uphold and defend our own and others' rights. In this we are not defiant of the Legislative Assembly. We are bold and dare openly affirm, and have affirmed that the legislation is notoriously one-sided. Who says it is not ? Why, Mr. Robert Campbell, the Exposer of the Preten- sions of Messrs. LaTia:, Burnet & Co., not knowing who the ignorant persons are who have been contending that the Legis- lature cannot legislate for this Church because it is the " Church of Scotland." We leave the matter to the conscious knowledge of Mr. Robert Campbell. We may add before we leave the matter of the sham lawsuits, that not one of them has been tried on its merits. The judgments have all been on side issues ; this notably so with the London and the Bayfield cases. Sham Lawsuits : — 1. The London suit was commenced bv the Unionists. 2. The Bayfield suit 3. The W'illiamston suit " If Urgo — The Unionists' suits are shams. 24 Wo strongly advise Mr. Robert Campbell to try the issue of going into court to ask that Lang, Burnet & Co. be restrained from calling themselves the Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. It is worthy of his chivalry inherited from his fathers. The Exposer of the Pre- tensions of the firm imagines that " the Parliaments of the country wo'ald grant the necessary legislation to prohibit the Anti-Unionists from calling themselves by such a name as only breeds confusion in the domain of property." Confusion, in- deed, in the domain of property ! To whom, we ask, do the deeds of Church property declare that that property belongs ? In every case, they affirm, to the Presbyterian Church of Can- ada in connection with the Church of Scotland. Inalienably — for ever. The Legislative Assembly of Ontario takes the pro- perty belonging by right and law to one Church and gives it to another. Verily, we think, in our own common-sense way, that the new order of things gravely prrmulgated from the fountains of law are likely to breed confusion in the domain of property. We regret much that we have only oi-' good Saxon word with which, though it borders on slang, to express our opinion of Mr. Robert Campbel)'': views — that one word is Cheek ! ! III. We almost weary in pursuing the Exposer of the Preten- sions of Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., througli his trying and vapid repetitions. Like liimself, he now starts off at a tangent on the historical reasons why the Corporal's Guard that declined to enter the Union should not be allowed to claim the name of " The Presbyterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland." Its past record is passed in review. " Able men have served the Church." " Tlie Church itself an influence in the country." " The former names reflected lustre and dignity upon it." Mr. Robert Campbell's own, doubtless, radiant with all tlie brightness inherited from the chivalry of his fathers. Queer ! Except in the clerical almanac, you will not find Mr. Robert Campbell's name. I forgot, it does occur on tlie two Dages of another pamphlet, illustrating an obscure presbyterial case which arose in the Presbytery of Montreal. We may be uncharitable, but we would not like to deprive him of the honor and lustre and dignity arising from assisting othor pamphleteers beside himself in aspersing the fair, untarniabod name and fame of one not to be named in the same breath with that of Mr. Robert Campbell. We refer to the brave, honou»- able, real and sterling Hev. Mr. Lang of Montreal, who new once receives the courteous title which he deserves from his Exposer throughout the pamphlet. Renewed attempts are made to belittle the Ministers of our Church who have been steadfast to their vows. Such conduct will only recoil upon his own head, and form the materihil out of which reasoning ones will form a just estimate of his Christian character. The exposer of the Pretensions ^axes wroth, and says : " I protest against the confusion that w I be imported into the history of the Presbyterian Church of Ctiiiada in connection with the Church of Scotland if this folly ol heirs is persisted in." We purpose as we shall receive grace i > > pur- sue our chosen path, and when placed in circumstances to . arry on our work, and minister to those who wish our services, as if the secession of the illustrious men who have been relegati^d to the shady seats of the Union Church had never left us. This, two, independent of smile and frown. We seek all men's f'avor> but only that we may advance our work. tv. "If Lang, Burnet k Co. are not 'The Presbyterian Church of Canada in conneption with the Church of Scotland,' what are they? Atoms." Well answered, Mr. Robert Campbell. Atoms are the constituent parts of matter, and Lang, Bmnet & Co. constitute the Church of Scotland in Canada ; small, it is true, but living, sentient atoms. United by a common sympa- thy, banded together by a common tie, urged to duty by a com- mon aim and common motive, all willing to spend and be spent in the Master's service and for His glory. We know nothing of Congregationalists, though we might throw in our lot with them — when our Presbyterianism ccasea to be cynosure of our eyes and hearts. 36 We are carrying out our plans and purposes. We have had settlements of ministers over congregations — we employ four missionaries, three of them ordained missionaries, doing «,'ood work, ministering to large and increasingly large congregations. From many quarters we have cries for help. One congregation within our bounds has waited for nineteen long months for ser- vice, ever> man, woman and child of them steadfast to the Church of their fathers. Another, through the agencv of an accomplished and energetic missionary, has developed one con- gregation into four, and that, too, amid the strenuous obstruc- tions thrown in liis way by former brethren in tlie Lord. The F^xposcr of the Pretensions of Lang, Buvnet & Co. drags his pamphlet to a weary length with numerous repetitions. He seems to dote on the bantling styled " The Pretensions Exposed, etc., etc.," — speaks of its beginning, middle and end — its aim to enlighten all men. Christians, men belonging to the Press, Cov- ernmeuts, denominations, in fact, all and sundry. Lang, Burnet &, Co. are henceforth to be known as " Seceders." Probably tliey are as likely to be known as the wheat, the chaff having been blown away. However that may be, we are persuaded that tlie Press of the country will follow their courteous con- duct in the future as in the past — scyle, as due, Mr. Robert Campbell as a member of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, and Messrs. Lang, Burnet & Co., what they really are, of the Presbvterian Church of Canada in connection with the Church of Scotland. With strange fatality, this Exposer of Lang, Burnet & Co. seeks to mislead the few who will read his pamphlet in regard to the Church of Scotland in the Lower Provinces. None more staunch, none more true to their Church and her principle^: uhan the Church of Nova Scotia. None have ever been truer than they. Mr. Robert Campbell places himself as the mentor of the Church of Scotland, kindly suggests to that Church : Pat them on the back, be kind to them, and they will be won over to us. Suppress the " Seceders." How cheerfully I use the suggested designation — suppress the remnant true to tlie Church of Scotland, who in Ontario and Quebec are not unlikely to carry their aims, and deprive us of our fancied secured, but ill- f .t 1 2^ gotten aains, and become the recognized Church of Scotland of the colony. " Give no funds to the ' Seceders ' " as an organ- ized Church. Futile and empty cry — like calling spirits from the vasty deep. We have heard it said by those who know chat the Rev. Robert Campbell, Minister of St. Grabriel, was read through and through and understood like a book when recently in Scotland. May his recent " Flag of Distress " be so read — its ill-nature, uucharitableness, colored and untruthful state- ments be equally patent. " Oh, wad 8ome power the giftie gie us To see oursel's as others see us ; It wad frae monie a blunder free us, And foolish notion. " The Exposer of the Pretensions of Lang, Burnet & Co. places the firm in the ranks of the rebellious, and compares tl'.eir sin to "witchcraft." We have heard of a Scotch proverb that compares the sin of ingratitude to witchcraft, nay, that it is worse. In this Mr. Robert Campbell we have one who has been fostered, cherished, maintained, sup- ported, largely educated by the Church of Scotland and by her means, who owes his past and present status to her generosity and care, turning his heel against the liberal patron who has made him what he is — making haste, as opportunity is presented, to show his new-born zeal for the new Church into which he has entered just like all proselytes who require to be painstaking in their doings to prove the completeness of their conversion. We take present leave of Mr. Robert Campbell, assuring him that the true Church of Scotland and her time-honored princi- ples shall not want a defender, even though he be one of the least of God's Israel, as long as reason, a just sense of right and the memory of favors conferred remains in a grateful and loving heart. Mr. Robert Campbell may rest assured that every renewed attempt of his and his abettors to detract will be met " with good for evil," in the deeper attachment, more earnest work, and greater devotion to Christ's cause and covenant than we have yet exhibited. London, 29th January, 1878