FAULTS AND FAILURES or THE LATE ^w. PRESBYTERIAN UNION IIsT GJ^l^-^JDJ^. KY DOUGLAS BRYMNER FOR SALE BY Dawson & Bkos., - Montreal. Reid Bros., - - London. 1 James Bain, Toronto. John Mills, - - - London. j Duncan «S; Co., - 1 - Hamilton. E. A. Terry, - - Ottawa. i LONDON, ONT.: LONDON FRi:i-: I'KI-.SS IRINTING COMPANY, RICIIMOM) STRKF.T. - 1879 TO THE READER. 'rhe facts contained in the following pamphlet, although of comparatively limited interest in themselves, throw a light on the pretensions of the subordinate legislatures in Canada to deal with trusts and property of all kinds, over which they assume to exercise complete control. The clause of the British North America Act, empowering local legislatures to deal with ([uestions affecting property and civil rights, is held to justify the confiscation of private property and its transference to any one selected by the irresponsible decision of these legislative bodies, which are already numerous, and which may be added to irdefinitely as the Great North-West is settled and new provinces carved out of its territories. Apparently, if the claims set up on their behalf are to Ije held as correct, the only security any man, or set of men, can have for retaining his or their property is its insignificant value not making it worth coveting. The history of the Trust given in the following pages will serve to show the truth of this statement, as it is believed that the proof of the origin and ownership of the Fund in ([uestion is complete. I shall offer no apology for the manner in which the history of the Trust is traced. T have tried to give the facts as clearly as possible, together with the evidence. If they offend the delicate susceptibilities of any, the facts must be blamed, not the narrator of them. In dealing with these, it has not been possible to avoid mentioning the names of actors in the events spoken of; but no statement has been made that has not, I believe, been fully substantiated. In the last chapter, treating of the constitutional aspect of the case, I am aware that my views differ from those accepted as correct by many legal gentlemen. I can only say that, not being a lawyer, I may not be as competent as a professional man tO' discuss such tojMcs, but I have endeavored, at least, honestly to investigate for myself, and to give my views with the diffidence of a layman in the presence of legalluminaries. T need scarcely add, on this point, that no one but myself is responsible for these con- stitutional truths or errors. If I am wrong, and if the powers of local legislatures are so unrestricted as their advocates affirm, it seems to me that the old formula, once applied to the power of the Crown, may be justly repeated in respect to them, that "their power has increased, is increasing, and must be diminished." I have touched lightly on the course taken by the Canada Presbyterian Church, which was a scarcely disguised war of subjugation. It was with them sic vobis non vos, instead of the older expression, sic vos non vobis. If proof of this were needed, it may be found in the attacks upon our congregations, and in the fact that of the Ministers of our Church who joined the new body, numbers of them are now without pulpits, having been turned out under pretext of consolidating charges. Ill-educated lads, and still worse educated men, who should l)e following the plough or handling a "graip," are employed in summer as catechists and turned loose into pulpits, their prelections being the amusement of the unthinking and a source of regret to the serious and sober-minded. About one-half of the present pamphlet was, through the kindness of Rev. Alfred J. Bray, which I beg to acknowledge, published in the Canadian Spectator, the articles being written as required for the weekly issue of the jiaper, and in the evenings after the discharge of official duties. These articles, with a very few trifling corrections are reprinted as originally published, which may help to explain a slight repetition in details, of which a brief summary had previously been given. DOUGLAS BRYMNER. Ottawa, February, 1S79. Fy\ULTS AND FAlLUkRS oi'- •nii: I \ri-: PRESBYTERIAN UNION IlsT a J^1>T Jk.JD J^ , 1!Y DOUGLAS BR^■MNER, /•(9A' S.'ILE nV Dawson & Son, - Montreal. Keid Bros., London Jamks Bain, Toronto. John Mm.ls, - London Duncan iS: Co., - Hamilton. E. A. I'ERRY, OlTAWA LONDON, ONT.: LONDON EREE I'RKSS PRINTING COMPANY, RICHMOND STREET, 1879 FAULTS AND FAILURES OK THE I.ATK PRESBYTERIAN UNION IN CANADA. I. Recent events have led tt> warm discussions as to the powers of I .coal Legislauires in this country, and as to the constitutional ])osition they occupy. It was scarcely to be expected tiiat the great change effected l)y the confederation of the Provinces could be accomplished williout doubts arising as to the limits of the |>owers and duties of the Federal Parliament and the Local Legislatures. Hence, whatever the political result of the present discussions, there seems to he little doubt that light will be thrown on such points, and that the boundaries and limits of tiie powers of these legislative bodies will, in course of time, be marked out .and estal)Hshed. The political bearings of the question 1 have no intention to examine. Put in connection with important Trusts and Trust i)roperties, with which I^ocal Legislatures believe themselves empowered to deal, under the clause of the British North America Act assigning to them a jurisdiction over iiroperty and civil rights, there nave arisen many difficulties. The Temp(jralities' Kurd of the I'resbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, is one of the Trusts dealt with by the Local Legislatures, on what I conceive to l)e a mistaken idea of their powers. For the sake of clearness it may be well, before showing the origin of the Fund, to give a brief statement of the relation to it of the various ecclesiastical bodies to which the residue of the Fund (if there be any) has been assigned, on the sole ground, appar- ently, that they are all Presbyterians and that a m.ajority has so willed it, although that majority never had any claim on the Fund, and one portion of these bodies distinctly laid it down as a principle that it would not accept aid from the State directly or indirectly. These bodies, in common with the Church of Scotland, having one general mode of ( hurch government, through various Church Courts, but with no recognizelaiid nor sympathise with tiie claims of the Kree (.'hiircli, which attempts to set up an ecclesiastical supii'inacy for itself, whilst denouncing' in the most hitter and iiiiineasiired term- tlu' same assiimijtioiis on the |iart of aiiollier. This wab the siew taUen by Sir jaiiies (Jraham in reference to the " ('laim of Rijjhts," whicli, he said, demanded that all the proceedings of the Church, whether le},nslative or judicial, should he beyond the coj^'iiizance of the courts of law, which should have no power to determine whether matters brought before them w^ere within the scope of their authority, if, in the oi)inion of the ('hurch, these matters involsed any si)iritual consideration, and that neither sentences of courts nor decrees of the I louse of Lords should be effectual if they interfered with the rights and privileges of the Church, of which interference, and of which s])iritual considerations the Church itself was to be the exclusive judge. Earl, then Loril John, Russell, concurred in this view, as did other statesmen on both sides of politics. Sir Robert Peel said emphatically : " This II()u.-.e and the country never could lay it down, that if a dispute should arise in respect of the statute law of tiie land, sucli dispute should be referred to a tribunal not subject to an appeal to the House of Lords. If peace could be secured, if the rights of the subject could l)e maintained consistently svith the demands of the Cliurch, then, indeed, such is my opinion of the pressing evils of this protracted dis]Hitati()n, that I should almost l)e induced to make any concession to obtain trantjuillity. liul my belief is that such claims, were you to concede them, would be unlimited in their extent. If the 1 louse of Commons is jnepared to depart from those l)rinciples on which the Reformation was founded, and which principles are essential to the maintenance of the civii and religious li])erties of the country, nothing but evil would result, the greatest evil of which would be the establishment of religious domination, which would alike endanger the religion of the country and the civil rights of man." That i)atronage was the mere stalking horse used by the leaders of the jtarty which ultimately became the Free Church, and that ecclesiastical sujireinacy under the name of Spiritual Independence, was the real object aimed at, is abundantly evident from the course followed since the ai)olition of ]iatronage in Scotland, where an attempt h.is been made to draw together two ecclesiastical bodies holding the most op[)osite views, with the object of disendowing and disestablisliing the Church of Scotland. That the mem- bers of the branch of the Churcli of Scotlantl in this country refuse to join with those whose sympathies, and, bef(Me long, whose active efforts, wjll be added to those of their friends in the Mother Country, is simply a duty they owe to themselves and to ihe Church by which they have been fostered. As represented everywhere, their objections are childish, arising from stupid obstinacy. But they are more than that. They are founded on reason and on justice, on the love of constitutional liberty, respect for the laws and determination to jneserve the riglits of conscience. Lest I should be susjiected of using the words of those who were opposed to the claims of the I'Vec Church, I quote the following from one of the leading authorities of that body, the Rev. Dr. Kennedy, of Dingwall, in a lecture delivered last January. His claim to speak on behalf of that Church and his ability to do so must be fully recognised by all who have followed her history. The W'ord Erastiantsm placed in antithesis to Papacy, did good service in its day, but sensible men now laugh at the long pole, white sheet, scooped-out turnip and candle-end which frightened the ignorant. In the present case it means simply Constitutionalism. Dr. Kennedy says : "As to spiritual independence I will only say that there can be no difficulty in prov- ing the Free Church doctrine regarding it to be Scriptural. Christ is King of Zion. As such it is His to appoint the province, the organization and the work of the Church. It is His, too, to issue laws for her guidance in the performance of her work, and, as He has done so, it is not allowable that the Church should conform her action to any other rule, or subject her will to any other authority. Her King is alive and He hath the seven spirits of God, He can, therefore, effectually regulate the action of the Church. The Church should not submit to any authority but Christ's in doing her proper work, and she requires no otliiT puiilanct.' than tliat of lliswnnl and spirit in ()v, simple, honest men but one meaning can attach to these words. Yet, in the face of these, and, as I shall shortly show other expressions equally strong, Dr. Cook, the writer of these words, and who signed them in his official capacity, had the boldness, as a member of the IJoard which sought to appropriate the Fund belonging to the Church he and other members of the 15oard had left, to instruct his attorneys to set up the plea to set aside the Writ of Injunction obtained in 1875, that there never had been any real connection with the Church of Scotland on the part of the Church in Canada, which, to use his own words, had demanded recognition, as belonging to an Established Church of the Ih-itisJi Empire, co-ordinate witli the Church of England I The question may very pertinently be asked : — Was there an attempt made to obtain a share of the benefits of the Clergy Reserves by setting up the false pretence that the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, represented in Canada one of the National Churches so completely that she was entitled to all the advantages bestowed by the Act of Union, ecjually with the Church of England, or was the statement in 1875, in the legal plea, a direct violation of the truth ? These, to say the least, singular variations may be allowable to an advocate anxious to gain his case : they can scarcely add to the reputation of a Minister of the Gospel.* The evidence of Hon. William Morris as to the connection with the Church of Scotland can as little be doubted as that of Dr. Cook. In the same year, 1837, that gentleman was sent to Great Ikitain in reference to the claims of members of the Church of Scotland living in Canada, that is, members and adherents of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of .Scotland. It is necessary to be very particular on this head. At a meeting held in Cobourg, at which Mr. Morris was appointed, the following, among other resolutions, were passed : — "That under and by virtue of the Act of Union, the adherents of the Church of Scotland, in any British Colony, arc entitled to a communication of all civil and religious rights, &c., equally with the adherents of the Church of England. "That in terms of the Act of Union, the status of the Church of Scotland, is co- ordinate with that of the Church of England, &c. "That with the view of effectually removing the disabilities under which we labour, we address His Majesty and the Imperial Parliament of Great Britain, praying that a declatory Act of the Inqjerial Parliament may be passed, to remove all our disabilities, and to restore us to that position to which by the Act of Union we are entitled. * It may be remarked that the connection was not maintained by Dr. Cook sofely in public church documents, signed by him officially. That reverend gentletnan set up the connection asapleafor obtaining allowances from the British Government for tiis own iJcrson.ii benefit. I shall give only one instance. In a letter to the Secretary of War, of nth August, 1844, (the date may be noted, as it was after the first secession in Canada) Dr, Cook, after setting forth his claim, says : " I have to state that I was engaged by th : Commantling Officer, Lt.-Col. Crabbe, to give separate services to the 74th, he stating it to be the privilege of that regiment, as being a Scotch regiment, to have the services of a Chaplain of the Church of Scotland, when these could be obtained." lO "That all members of our Church throughout Canada should resist by every constitutional means all attempts to encroach on our rights, and should rest only when no disability shall remain to be removed, and when the proiisions of the Act of Union, in reference to the Chnrcli of Scotland, shall be fully complied with.'''' There were sixteen resolutions in all, but the extracts sufficiently show their nature. It is unnecessary to speak in detail of the steps taken by Mr. Morris to vindicate the claims of the Church wliich he was sent to represent. He emphatically claimed for it the privileges asked for by the petition which he carried with him, and on his return received the thanks of the Synod and a testimonial to he preserved as an heir-loom in his family. Vet Mr. John L. Morris, his son, a member of the Board which is administering, for the benelit of those who have joined another communion, the fund belonging solely to the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, had the hardihood, in 1875, to set up the plea that there never was any real connection with the Church of .Scotland. As one of the attorneys for the Board it may be laudable in him to use any plea, but that can scarcely be a virtue in an advocate which is a sin in an elder. Ilowever, he may plead the example of ecclesiastical gentlemen in mitigation of the offence, for we know that " Ev'n ministers they hae been kenned In holy rapture, A rousing whid at times to vend And nail't wi' Scripture." It may be objected that the claims set up by the adherents in Canada of the Church of Scotland were never acknowledged as valid, and that, therefore, those who had seceded in 1875 must not be condemned as inconsistent in first making the demands and then, finding them untenable, accepting the defeat and conforming their actions to the reality as brought home to them by an adverse decision. I will in answer to this supposed objection show: — I. That the Church of Scotland admitted and supported the claim of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, to be her representative in Canada, and as such entitled to demand and receive all the benefits arising from the fact of her being a National Church ; and 2. That the Imperial Parliament recognized and provided for the claims of that Church, At the meeting of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in May, 1837, the report of a committee appointed to consider the position of the Church relative to the appropriation of the Clergy Reserves recommended that the most energetic measures should be ailopted by the Assembly to procure a portion of that source of revenue for the Church of Scotland in the colonies. That report was approved of. In May, 1839, at the meeting of Assembly, the report of the Colonial Committee, adopted by the Assembly, states that "the Committee embrace every opportunity for asserting and maintaining the rights of members of the Church of Scotland resident in the British Colonies to all the privileges and emoluments secured by the Treaty of Union to the Established Churches of the United Kingdom. " The Assembly itself records its heartfelt acknowledgment for the "satisfactory assurance given to the representatives with reference to the claims of the Church of Scotland on the Clergy Reserves in Canada." In the appendix to the Committee's report is a letter, dated 4th January, 1839, from Sir George Grey, Colonial Secretary, addressed to the chairman of Committee, containing, when viewed in the light of the counter statement of Dr. Cook in 1875, tlis following remarkable words: "Your letter of the 20th November, on the subject of the memorial of the Rci'. Dr. fohn Cook relative to the grant to the Church oj Scotland in Lower Canada out of the Clergy Reserve Fund, was received," Ac. On the 5th of March, 1839, the Colonial Committee of the General Assembly, speaking of the Clergy Reserves, "conceive that a memorial should be prepared to be laid before Iler Majesty's (iovernment respecting the legal claims of the Church of Scotland ; a recognition should be sought from Government as to the rights of the Church of Scotland to be considered as an essential part of the Protestant established religion in Canada, .... and further agreed to the recommendation of the acting Committee, that a deputation should be sent to London to present the memorial « 1 1 and urge the claims of the Cluuch of Scotland in Canada on the consideration of lier Majesty's Government," (that is, the claims of the Presiiyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland.) So much for the action of the Mother Church. What course did the Government follow? On the 7th August, 1840, an Act was passed (3 and 4 Vic, cap. Ixxviii.) recognizing the claims thus put forward, and providing, amoni^'st other arrangements respecting the Reserves, that "the net interest, &c., accruing upon the investments of the proceeds of all sales of such Reserves .... sliall l)e divided into three equal parts, of which two shall be appropriated to the Chvich of England and one to the Church of Scotland in Canada." III. The first secession, which took place in 1844, naturally divides the history of the Church into two periods ; the first bringing us to the secularization of the Reserves in 1855, and the second from that date to 1875, when the second secession took place. Following the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, tlie Imperial Act of 1840 clearly acknowledged that the Church of Scotland was entitled to the same privileges in a British Colony as the Church of England. That the interjiretation of the Law Officers as to the exclusion of dissenters was correct, is not doubtful, when examined by the known facts of the history of the period. Even the courts of law did not admit that dissenting bodies were entitled to claim legal protection, a fact which may be lamented, but which cannot be denied. It was, therefore, solely on the ground of ' ing a National Church, and her ministers therefore Protestant Clergy, in the strictly \< d sense of the term, that the Synod in this coimtry in connection with tlie Church of Scotland was officially recognized by I ler Majesty's reinesentatives and the I'-xecutive Government. That the Roman Catholics and Methodists received grants out of certain accrued revenues of the Reserves does not change that fact. Both grants were confessedly wrong. The manner of admission of the United Synod of Upper Canada as part of the Synod in connection with the Church of Scotland may simply be referred to, as still further showing the close and intimate connection between the Mother Church and the Church in the Colony. It was not till the Synod of Ulster (Presbyterian Church in Ireland) was admitted to ministerial communion with the Church of Scotland, tliat her licentiates here, organized into the United Synod of Upi)er Canada, could be admitted to the Synod representing the Church of Scotland in Canada. When admitted thev made an unqualified subscription to the formula of tlie Church of Scotland without re rve or open questions, merging their existence completely in that of the Church they were joining. Not long after, the Synod became divided into two sharply defined parties, the one adhering to the Constitutional, the other to the Non-Intrusionist party in the Church of Scotland. The result was the secession in 1844 ^^ those wlio were in sympathy with the latter. It is not my intent: jn to enter into tlie merits or details of this first secession, the sole object now being to consider the l^earing of what has been called the " Act of Independence," on which mach stress has been laid by those who secceded from the connection with the Church of Scotland in 1875. It wiU be well, therefore, to look at this Act somewhat closely and to view it in the light of what followed, as well as of what preceded its adoption. The seceders of 1875 plead that whatever connection existed between the Church of Scotland and the Church here previous to 1844, was ended by the " Act of Inde- pendence " passed by the Synod that year. IIow far do the facts immediately attending the passing of the Act support this plea ? There had been a fierce struggle between those who wished to retain and those who wished to sever the connection with the Church of Scotland; there had been a motion that the peculiar connection which had hitherto subsisted between them and the Church of Scotland should from that time forth 12 , cease and determine; according to Dr, Cook's letter of instruction to Dr. Mathieson, already (|uoted, and the other evidence given that connection was so close as to entitle the Synod in Canada to claim a portion of the Clergy Reserves as belonging to an Established Church of the British Empire co-ordinate with the Church of England. It is (juite clear, then, how that j)eculiar connection was regarded. It was asked that the words " in connection willi tlie Churcli of Scotland " should be expunged from the title of the Synod; that all peculiar privileges should be withdrawn from ministers and elders of that Church; that, in short, the Synod was no longer to be either in name or reality a branch of the Church with which it liad down to that period, teste Cook, been identi- fied. The struggle ended in a separation, those seceding leaving a protest charging those who remained with "corruptions and defections," with having committed "sin in matters fundamental," and declaring that the Protesters could no longer with a clear conscience hokl office in the Church wliich persisted in retaining its connection with the Church of Scotland. Desirous of reuniting to the Church those who had seceded, the Synod was called together two months after the meeting at wliich the secession had taken place. Every disposition was shown to conciliate, and the Act of Independence was passed, a purely declaratory Act, the preand)le to which sets out : "Whereas this Synod has always, from its first establishment, possessed a perfectly free and supreme jurisdiction over all the congregations and ministers thereof," &c. In other words, it possessed a complete system of Responsible Government, whilst holding the closest relations to the Mother Church, as Canada to the Mother Country. The seceders, however, refused all compromise; nothing but complete severance from the Church of Scotland would satisfy them, and at the meeting of Synod in 1845, ^^''^ Committee to negotiate with them so reported, stating that the Conference had abruptly terminated because of the hostile sentiments expressed regarding the Church of Scot- land, after, it must be remembered, the Act of Independence had l)een passed, which it is now alleged severed the connection. The inference, then, must surely be unmistak- able, that there was, in 1844, no severance of the connection with the Church of Scot- land, except on the part of those who had positively withdrawn from the communion and had accepted the invitation tendered by the newly-formed Free Church, supported as it was by clerical representatives from that body, who came from Scotland to Canada to enlist support in the British American Colonies. But the matter is not left to mere inference. There is positive proof of the light in which the connection was viewed, subsequent to 1844, both by the Synod and by the Civil Government, In 1851, after long and careful discussion, a series of resolutions was adopted, not as the work of one man, but as that of the Synod itself, the original draft having' been freely amended. It begins with these remarkable words, if the theory of those who have lately seceded be true, "Be it resolved and declared I. That the Church of Scotland, of wJiich this Synod is a branch, has always believed and assented," &c. The resolutions are long, and I will only quote a few sentences from them. The fourth begins : "That, ever since the formation of this Synod, our ecclesiastical relationship has been acknowledged by the Parent Church, in every way contormable to her constitution and our own ecclesiastical independence; and on this ground our ministers and people have for the last thirty years asserted their right to all the benefits of a connection with her as one of the Established Churches of the British Empire. Especially we long pleaded our legal claim to a portion of the lands in Canada, set apart for the maintenance of a Protestant Clergy, on the ground of the proper legal import of that designation and of the Treaty of Union between England and Scotland." The concluding paragraph of the last resolution is of great significance, affording the clearest proof of the settled determination of the Synod to establish a permanent endowment for the benefit of posterity and for the promotion of their spiritual interests, 13 as opposed to the attempt to squander llie Fund now under discussion, on the part of those who had bound themselves to maintain it intact and to add to it as opportunity offered. "The present ministers of this Synod have only a very personal interest in the question, but it belongs to them to teach and to witness, that the Church of Christ, though a spiritual body, has legal rights and temporal possessions, which she ought to defend, and, as she best may, to transmit, not only undiminished but enlarged to her perpetual posterity." And Dr. Cool< was ap]iointed, along with the Moderator and Clerk, to draw up a pastoral address to the jieojjle in these terms. It is singular how closely associated Dr. Cook's name is with tlie struggle for the funds, and, being gifted with a facile pen, how clear is the eviden :e of the view he took of the claims of the Church on the Reserves. I must confess to having searched in vain to discover his name connected with the pro- motion of missionary enterprises, either home or foreign. Then, again, subsequent to the secularization of the Clergy Reserves, the claim of the Synod here to represent the Church of Scotland was admitted by the Duke of New- castle, the adviser of the Prince of Wales during the visit of His Royal Highness to this country in i860. The Rev. Dr. Mathieson, of St. Andrew's Church, Montreal, had been chosen Moderator of the Synod that year, and it had been resolved by the Synod that an address should be presented to the Prince of Wales at the levee to be held at Montreal on the 27th August. Finding, almost at the last moment, that the branch of the Church of England was to be received by the Prince as the representative of the National Church, whilst the branch of the Church of Scotland was to be placed on a footing of inferiority, the Synod's Committee sent a letter to the Duke of Newcastle, which bears so closely on the question that I give it in full, with the exception of a short sentence having no relation to the point at issue. "Montreal, 27th August, i860. "My Lord Duke, — I have dutifully to acknowledge the receipt, through the Governor-General's Secretary, of the notification that it is His Royal Highness' pleasure to receive the address of the Church of Scotland from myself as the b-c-arer of it, but not to be read or replied to at the time. Having been informed that n different course is to be followed in the reception of the address from the sister Church of England, I beg very respectfully to represent to Your (Jrace, that, as a branch of the Established Churches of the Empire, the Church of Scotland in Canada is, in the eye of the law, constitutionally on a footing of equality with the Church of England in this Province, and that what- ever privileges are possessed by the one Church belong of right to the other. "Of course, as individuals, the members of the deputation are proud of the oppor- tunity of expressing in any way that may be pointed out to them their loyalty to the Crown and their respect for His Royal Highness, but, as representing the Church of Scotland in Canada, their consenting to occupy a position of inferiority to that accorded to the sister Church of England on so interesting an occasion as the present, would be receiyed with extreme suspicion by the large and respectable body on whose behalf they have been appointed to act. " I have the honour, &c., "Alexander Mathieson, D.D., "Moderator." When the letter was delivered it was too late to remedy the error at the Montreal levee, but the Duke of Newcastle officially recognized the justice of the claim, and a special audience was granted at which the address was formally read and presented, the reply of the Prince being couched in terms of respect for the National Church there represented. In tracing the Fund to its source, it was my intention to show that it was derived from grants made on the definite ground that the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, was, by virtue of that connection, the repre- H scntative in Canada of one of the National Churches of tlic Empire ; that not only down to 1844, when the first secession took place, but subseciuently to that period, and after the passinf^ of the declaratory Act of independence, tliat connection so clearly existed as to entitle the Synod to demand and receive all the privileges thence arising. Few will venture to deny that ample proof has ])een given on these points. I have, however, entered more minutely into the history of the Church than might have l)een necessary, were it not that the jirinciple involved is one which affects all Trusts, all properties, every incorporation, anil it was therefore desiral)le in the present instance to throw tlie fullest light on the subject. Once admit the principle that Trusts, no matter how plain are their terms, are at the mercy of clamour from men who choose to attack the rights of others on the ground of a similarity of name and the plea of numbers, and to what would it lead ? The ]\i\-.k of Montreal is a wealthy corporation, whose shares are held in comparatively few hanrls. It is not probable, but it is conceivalile, that a demand might arise for the transfer of its property to some other institution by men calling them- selves bankers on the strength of exchanging uncurrent money for bank bills, and main- taining, very probably correctly, that they were a majority, even although they had never held a share in the liank of Montreal. The su})position is a violent one, no doubt, but it simply illustrates the line of argument adopted by those who have sought to set aside a Trust on the ground that they have a similar name to those for whose benefit it was constituted, and that they are a majority in point of numbers. IV. The secession from the Synod in connection with the Church of Scotland, in 1844, intensified the hostility to the Clergy T^eserves, by adding a new element of bitterness. The adherents in Canada of the Free and the United Presbyterian Churches attacked them with passionate vehemence. Anti-Clergy Reserve Associations were formed among the one, the most active agitation was kept up by the other. They denounced the recijMents of them as Achans, who had taken from the spoil a goodly Babylonish garment, shekels of silver and wedges of gold. Alas ! how had the fine gold become dim, when these violent denouncers of Achan's sin went to the Local Legislatures to obtain their sanction to stone the unhappy Achan and his household with stones, but the Babylonish garment, the shekels of silver and the wedges of gold were too valuable to be lost, and so, like Saul, when ordered to destroy the Amalekites and all their herds and flocks, they preserved the best of the spoil, and put King Agag ii) the post of honour as Moderator, throwing the i)lame on the people, who took of the plunder to sacrifice to the Lord. This very Fund, derived from a polluted source, according to their oft repeated declarations, they have taken power to appropriate. The words of the Act are these : — "Any part of the said Fund (the Temporalities' Fund) that may remain to the good, after the death of the last survivor of the said ministers, shall thereupon pass to and he subject to the disposal of the Supreme Ct)urt of the said United Church, for the purpose of a Home Mission Fund for aiding weak charges in the United Church." " What meaneth then this bleatin^f the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear? " Is there no Mause Ileadrigg to testify against the corruptions and defections of this backsliding generation ? • The proceedings in regard to the Clergy Reserves in the Legislature of the old Province of Canada are very interesting, but, not being necessary to the present pur- pose, a detailed notice of them may be omitted. In 1853 an Imperial Act was passed, authorizing the Provincial Legislature to settle the vexed question, which contained the following clause : — " Provided, that it shall not be lawful for tlie said Legislature, by any Act or Acts thereof, as aforesaid, to annul, suspend or reduce any of the annual stipends or allow- ances which have been already assigned and given to the clergy of the Church of Eng- >5 land and Scotland, or to any other Religious 15odies or Denominations of Christians, in Canada, (and to which the faith of the Crown is pledged), (hiring the n.iUiral lives or incumbencies of the parlies, now receiving the same, or lo api)ropriate or apply to any other purposes such part of the said proceeds as may be recjuired to provide for the payment of such stipends and allowances during su'.h lives and in- cumbencies." It will be observed that in this clause mention is made of other religious bodies, which might have been entitled to claim, by the conditi()nal term, "to which the faith of the Crown is pledged." In reality there were none to whom that term could apply, except the clergy of the Churches of England and Scotland. The Roman Catholic Church in Lower Canada had received a small amount from the casual revenues t)f the Reserves by an annual grant of the Imperial Parliament ; in Upper Canada the same Church received assistance, partly from the same source, partly from an annual vote of the Provincial Legislature; the British Wesleyan Methodists in Upjier Canada had been paid entirely out of the Grants in aid of the Civil Expenditure. The latter might be, no doubt was, drawn from the casual revenues of the Reserves, but the form in which the charge appears in th(; Provincial Accounts showed that it was felt to be an expendi- ture of at least doubtful legality. This was evidently the view taken of the position of these two Churches, from the very terms used in defming their claims in the Provincial Act, assented to on the 1 8th December, 1854. In the case of the clergy of the Churches of England and Scotland, their annual stipends were provided for during their lives and incumbencies, by being made a first charge on the funds out of which they were to be paid, " in preference to all other charges and expenses whatever," whilst the Roman Catholic Church and the British Wesleyan Church for Indian Missions, were only pro- vided for during twenty years after the passing of the Act, and no longer. So much stress was laid on the words in the Act as to "the faith of the Crown," during the dis- cussions that preceded the Union, and since then, that 1 have thought it des^able to make this explanation, which, otherwise, would have been needless. That the payments from the Clergy Reserves were made to ministers of the Presby- terian Church in Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, on the sole ground of that connection, and that they were claimed by the ministers of that Church on that special and only ground, has been proved beyond a doubt. PVom the first (3pini()n of the Law Officers of the Crown in 1819, down to the passing of the Act of the Pro- vincial Legislature in 1854, there is not a linlc wanting. In the last mentioned Act power was taken to commute with the parties interested, so that the annual stipends might he liquidated in one sum, the amount to 1 e calculated upon the probable duration of the life of each minister. This was done, because it was considered, in the words of the Act, "desirable to remove all semblance of connection between the Church and State." The money distributed by this commutation was to be the personal property of each commuter, and henceforth, therefore, it changes its character, being no longer a public grant, but private property, the Trust created by its means being, in short, a private endowment, such as Mr. Gladstone declared in dealing with the IriRh Church, no Government was entitled to lay hands on, even when, as he conceived it, a great national crisis justified exceptional, if not violent, measures. The Synod was called together in January, 1855, to consider what steps might be necessary to take advantage of the Commutation Act. The Imperial Act provided that only those should be entitled to life annuities whose names were on the roll of the Church Court to which they belonged on the 9th of May, 1853. Eleven ministers had been placed on the roll between that date and the meeting of Synod, for whom no pro- vision had been made, and it was therefore considered right that in some way or other their cases should not be disregarded. The sum to which each minister on the roll on 9th May, 1853, was entitled, was six hundred dollars annually for life, or that sum capi- talized, according to the probability of his life. The terms of the commutation were to be settled with Government by the Synod acting for each minister, but only on his granting a power of attorney in favour of the persons named by the Synod to act on its behalf and on behalf of all granting such power. i6 Steadfastly keeping in view tlie policy tint liad all along been adliered to hy the Church, of having a permanent endowment, it was thought that tlic time had arrive^ when such a beginning might be made as would secure in process of time a fund of some magnitude. Proposals to this effect were made to the members |iresent. After long and anxious consultation — after modifying and fre(iuently remodelling the proposed resolutions having that end in view, so as to secure that the fund, if constituted, could never be diverted from those who continued to adhere to the connection with tiie Church of Scotland — a series of resolutions was agreed upon as the basis of the contract on which the individual ministers agreed to invest their commutation money, which, had they so determined, they could have used for themselves and invested for their families. A circular was ordered to be sent to each minister, with a copy of the minutes containing the resolutions, so that, before signing the pnwer of attorney, all migiit be able deliber- ately to read and reilect on the terms. The third resolution is the key-note to the contract, and therefore the closest atten- tion should be given to its terms, which I give in full : — 3. "That all ministers be, and are hereby entreated, (as to a measure by which, under Providence, not only their own present interests will be secured, but a permanent endowment for the maintenance and extension of religious ordinances in the Church), to grant such authority in the fu'le-t manner, thankful to Almigiity God that a way so easy lies open to them for conferri.ig so important a benefit on the Church." The terms of the contract itself, in consideration of which the ministers were asked to sign, were very precise. There were two funtlamental principles laid down; one relating to the disposition of the interest of the fund; the other to the constitution of the fund itself, and the conditions on which alone any one was entitled to share in its benefits. The following are its clauses : By the powers of attorney the Commissioners were authorized "to grant acquittance to Government and 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 ht made, "The following, however, to be a fundamental principle, which it shall not 1)e competent for the Synod at any lime to alter, unless with the consent of the ministers granting such power and authority, that the interest of the Fund shall be devoted in the first instance, to the payment of ^II2 los. 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 jCii2 lOs,, be that of ministers now on the Synod's Roll and who have been put on the Synod's Roll since the 9th May, 1853." The plain, unmistakable, only meaning which these words can bear is so clear that it would be almost an insult to point it out, were it not that an attempt is made to give the words a totally different signification. The commuting ministers agreed by that clause to accept $450 instead of $600 annually, so as to help the eleven ministers settled from 9th May, 1853, till the meeting ot Synod in January, 1855, and took a solemn agreement from the Synod that that sum would never be lessened except with their own consent. If the interest yielded more than would meet their annuities, which consti- tuted a mortgage or privileged claim, then it was for the Synod, with their consent, to deal with the suri)lus as from time to time it might determine. With the annuities of the commuters the .Synod could not deal, so long as they complied with the second fundamental principle. I give it also in full : — " And, also, that it shall be considered a fundamental principle that all persons who have a claim to such benefits shall be ministers of the Presbyteiian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, that they shall cease to have any claim on, or be entitled to, any share of said Commutation Fund whenever they shall cease to be ministers in connection with the said Church." Let honourable business men characterize the conduct of those who could violate every obligation and yet seek to appropriate a fund so carefully hedged about. I wish to give the facts only, which form a strong enough condemnation, a condemnation which no words, however strong, could intensify. Upon the U'luis 1 have cited the coiumuling ministers gave tlie desired authority, and an Act, carefully prepared under the direction of the Synod, was passed by the Province of Canada, and assented to on the 24tli July, 1S58, The Act was a general Act for the whole i'rovinee, aflecling the rights, i)rivileges and property of residents of each section of the Province; the money by which the fund had l)een constituted had lieen derived by tlie donors from that section of the Province in which the charges of the individual ministers were situateil. The interests, therefore, were clearly not local, l)Mt general to the whole Province. • The preamble of the Act states tliat certain funds l)elonging to tlie Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, are held in trust by coinmis-iioners; that tiie funds so held in trust are for the encouragement and support of the ministers and missionaries of said Church, for the augmentation of their stipends and as a provision for those incajjacitrted. A corporation is created to hold these funds in trust, suljjoct to the conditions already (]uoted. The Poard of Managers must be ministers and mend)ers in full cor inunion witii the said Church, and it is provided that in "the event of the death, removal from the Province, or Icavitii^ the covimunion of the said Church, of any member of the I'oard, the remaining members are authorized to choose a successor, with the required (pialification, until the next meeting of Synod." The Poard is also authorized to dispose of or vary the investments, but only for the purpose of re-investment, they liaving no power to alienate any of the funds. Finally, the corporation could "hold their meetings at such place or places within this Province as they shall from time to time direct and ai)point,"' and as a matter of fact the elections always take place in Ontario and Quebec, wherever the Synod is meeting, and meetings of the Board have not unfretjuenlly been held in Upper Canada before, and in the same Province (now Ontario) after. Confederation. If this is not a general Act, which cannot be repealed by a Local Legislature, what is a general Act of the old Province of Canada ? V. The long struggle of sixty-tliree years was over; the Clergy Reserves were secular- ized ; the claims on them commuted ; the Fund constituted ; there was no longer any- thing to be gained by professing warm attacliment to the Church of Scotland. As in the case of the suitor of Hood's heroine, Miss Kilmansegg with the Golden Leg, " Who crime to court that heiress rich, And knoll at her foot — i needn't say whicli — Jiesieging her Castle of Sterling," the Clergy Reserves being gone, all other reserves might be dispensed with. The ink was scarcely dry on the Act of Incorporation of the Temporalities' Fund Board, when the work of breaking up the Church was begun. In i860, the first open attempt was made, but unsuccessfully. The design was not, however, abandoned, only postponed. I well remember a local politician in my salad days, whose nose, like Thackeray's, would have been improved ])y being " })aitially Romani;^ed," wlio used to lay his finger over the inverted arch of that ruined bridge and whisper mysteriously : "If you want to manufacture public opinion, get hold of a lot of enthusiastic boys." This was the process adopted in the present case, by the two or tliree who were pulling the secret strings, and who made these young men I'lieve they were leaders, whilst they were only tools. In 1870, it was believed that the pear was ripe, and a letter was sprung upon the Synod, signed by the Rev. Dr. Ormiston, Moderator, in 1869, of the Canada Presbyterian Church, addressed to Rev. Dr. Jenkins, who, that same year, was Mod- derator of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland. It was represented that the appointment of a Committee to confer on union, the ostensible object of the letter, was simply an act of courtesy, and a resumption of iS the old iicj^oliations for the ic-.idmission of those wlio liad seceded in 1S44. Taken hy surprise, the Synod allowed a Committee to be a))i)ointed, the only audible objection being the solitary protest from the Rev. Iluf^h Niven, not nrordni. The Committee sat for two years, its ])roceedings attracting little, if any, attention. In 1.S73, when a sub- stantive proposal was made, opposition was at once aroused. lUit in the meantime the official gentlemen interested had not been idle. They had secured control of the Church paper in 1872, and made of it a Union organ; many of the younger ministers of the Church, knowing nothing of the questions at issue, were easily influenced, and it was coolly assumed that the principle of Union had been conceded, and that all that remained was to settle the terms. Two theories have been hel'l as to the legislative powers of the Su|)remc Court of the Church (General Assend)ly or Synod, as the case may be). 'I'he one is, that all laws spring from the Supreme Court, the other that they originate in the inferior judi- catories before being considered by the whole Church. The distinction is one of very grave significance, and the latter had always been lield as the true theory, as well as observed in practice, by the branch in Canada of the Church of Scotland. ISy either theory, however, no legislation could be initiated in the .Supreme Court, except on an Overture, that is, a proijosition or representation, setting out the reasons for legislation. It is not a petition, although it may occasionally lie in that form. Dr. Hill, in his "Church Practice," in explaining the liarrier Act, thus describes the Overture : — "The proposal of making a new general law, or of repealing an old one, which, in our ecclesiastical langu.age, is termed an Overture, originates with some individual, who generally lays it before his presbytery or synod, that it may be sent to the Ceneral Assembly as their Overture. The General Assembly may dismiss the Overture, if they judge it unnecessary or improper, ot adopt it as it was sent, or introduce any alteration which the matter or form seems to require. If it is not dismissed, it is tmnsmitted in its original or its amended form to the several [nesbytcries of the Church for their con- sideration, with an injunction to send up their opinion to the next General Assembly, who may pass it into a standing law, if the more general opinion of the Church agree thereunto; that is, if not less than forty presbyteries approve." Substitute for "General Assembly" the name of "Synod," the letter being the Supreme Court of the Church in Canada, and the above is a plain statement of how the question should have been submitted, if such a revolutionary pio])osal as the extinction of the Church could have been submitted, to the Synod. There is, however, one essential point of difference between the Barrier Act in Scotland and here. In Scotland, as will be seen from the above extract, it recjuires the express consent of a majority of Presbyteries before an Act of the Church can become valid; in the branch in Canada, to meet a temporary difficulty with respect to its legislation, a radical change was intro- duced, by which the adoption of a proposed law became dependent, not on the formal consent of Presbyteries, but on the absence of dissent on the part of the majority, so that by a little careful manipulation, a proposal might be carried in Synod which had never been discussed at all in the inferior Church Courts, even although all formal steps had been taken. The introduction of the proposal to put an end to the separate existence of the Church without an Overture has been represented as a trifling breach of technical prac- tice, which was not of the slightest possible consequence. In reality it was a Revolution. The introduction of an Overture shows that the proposal has been carefully discussed beforehand, and has to some extent engaged the attention of the members of the Church. In this case a letter was addressed by one gentleman, Rev. Dr. Ormiston, not a member of the Church, to another, Rev. Dr. Jenkins, who had but a few years before been admitted to share its privileges. Each, it is true, was Moderator for the time being, but it was not even pretended that the letter was written officially. This jnivate, unofficial document was read to the Synod by Dr. Jenkins, who having slid, with that easy grace which is his peculiar charm, from Arminianism to Calvinism, now made himself useful in the interests of officialism, in setting himself to create that wandering desire on the part of the Church he had so recently joined, with which he had himself been seized in his theologically nomadic life. 19 Wlictlicr a iiifijorily or minority agrcdl to Ijrcak up the C'luirch, ami to ask the Local Legislature to set aside the conditions on which the Trust Funds and congre- gational propLTties wore held, is not the point at issue. IJut as a matter of fact, apart from inireiy legal considerations, the (jiicslion was settled by a small minority, instead of by a majority, l>y the returns made to the Synod, it ajjpeared that there were 138 congregations entitled to he represented in the Synod. According to ecclesiastical law, the minister and an elder from each congregation are members of the Synod, making 276 congregational re|)re^entatives. Tiie Professors of (^lucen's ('ollege, being ministers of the Church, are also mendiers, and of these there were live, being 2S1 in all. In June, 1S74, at Ottawa, 88 voted for Union, a little more than a per cent. In Novem- ber, 1874, at Toronto, 68 voted for Uni(jn, about 2O per cent., or little more than one- fourth of the wiiole Synod, anil on the representation that the Synod had deciy the Synod, and that all the Conjjrejjations had to do was to vote on the Masis. The articles con- tuined in that document were purposely va^,'we and colourless, a series of i)latiludes which no one could well deny, and which, therefore, afforded no room for jliscussion. The Congrej,'ations were not asked if they approved of joininj^ the Canada Presbyterian Church. 'I'he (luestion thus plainly jiut would have been emphatically answered in the negative, since the people who really belouf^ed to our Church well knew that the other body held theories totally at variance with their views, anet me show how the reports were made up. In one congregation, before the Basis was submitted, it was agreed by an unanimous vote that they should not enter into the Union. Nothing could be more emphatic or unmistakable. Hut the Minister was a Unionist, and he insisted that the Articles of the Hasis should also be put. This was done, and as nobody could say that there was anything not strictly true to be found in the vague generalities laid l)eforo the meeting as a Basis, the Minister, acting as Chairman, returned the Congregation as unanimously in favour of Union! In another, none of the Congregation would attend to consider the (juestion, which they rightly held to be unconstitutional, so the Minister, a Union man, got two friends to go with him, constituted a meeting, and returned that Congregation also as unanimously in favour of Union. In another, the Chairman .stated that no discussion would be allowed, a protest was lodged against the legality of the whole proceedings, one or two men and a lew girls and women voted yea to the Basis, the cpiestion of l'nion itself never having been submitted, and that Congregation, also, was returned as unanimously for Union. In still another, a very small meeting, there was one of a majority against the proposed Union. The Minister, a Union man, who acted as Chairman, on ascertaining the result, declared two undoubted members of the Church to be ineligible to vote, thus making one of a majority on the other side. But this also was returned as unammously in favour of Union ! Case after case of a similar kind might be quoted. No numbers were given in the report, and many of these facts were brought out in the course of the discussion in the Synod, yet in the face of such returns, of protests against the constitution- ality of the attempt to set aside the Charters and Title Deeds by which the Church and Congregational properties were held, of the fact that only about thirty-one per cent, of the Synod voted for the revolutionary proposal to put an end to the existence of the Church, it was recorded that it had been carried by "an overwhelming majority." Every man who has studied Parliamentary or Ecclesiastical proceedings is well aware that the ndes guiding the deliberations of such bodies are framed so as to protect the rights of all, and to prevent tyrannical majorities, obtained often from some hasty impulse of passion or excitement, from trampling on the rights, not merely of minorities, 22 but rather usually on those of tlie whole body of the peoiile. Yet it has been constantly asserted in tlie present case, that the setting aside of the most ordinary, yet most valuable, safeguards for the (Uic deliberation of so solemn a question as the extinction of a Church with so noble a lineage and history, was but the brushing aside of trifling technicalities, that could not have affected the result one way or other. Take the case of the direct Remit of the Basis of Union from the Synod to Congregations as an instance. A learned Judge, in entire ignorance of the laws of our Churcli, and disre- garding the general princii)le involved, treated the point as frivolous and unworthy of notice, the Remit to Congregations being in his view an act of grace, the Synod being bound to send it down only to Presbytenes. Of the true state of affairs his Lordship did not appear to have had the faintest glimmering. The mode I have already pointed out of sending down through Presbyteries to Kirk Sessions, thence to Congregations, if a special vote of the latter is desired, has its natural return movement from Congre- gations to Kirk Sessions, thence through Presbyteries to the Synod, and finally, if their be a higher Supreme Court, to the General Assembly. An illustration will, better than the abstract statement, show tlie evil arising from the violation of so elementary a rule of procedure. Having protested not only against the constitutionality of the proposal to transfer the properties of the Church to another body, but also protested and appealed against the very irregular and illegal proceedings at the meeting held in St. Andrew's, Ottawa, to adopt the Pasis, as we were told by the Chairman, I applied to the Kirk Session to transmit the appeal in regular course. The Session declined, on the ground of the Remit having been sent down direct from the Synod. Having obtained a certified extract of the minutes, I petitioned the Presbytery to the same effect, my object being, in both cases, to protect the rights of the members of the Church against what there was just reason to apprehend— the refusal of the ruling powers in the Synod to admit tlie appeal, on the ground of its not being transmitted through the regular channels. The result of the application to the Presbytery was what I expected. That Court, in a somewhat singular minute, declared "that it is not com- petent to discuss the (piestion, and, therefore, dismiss petitioner's desire." Agreeing, as in duty bound, with this estimate of their own incompetency, I ventured to point out, that they might refuse to grant my request, but could not dismiss my desire, which I still retained. I transmitted my protest and appeal to the Synod Clerk, and the Synod, on his report, declined to receive it, on the ground that it should have been transmitted through the subordinate Church Courts, they having previously declined to receive it, because of the Synod's own action. I have preserved the certified extracts of minutes, as proof of the — to say the least —unusual means that were taken to prevent the voice of the members of the Church it was proposed to break up, from being heard. In that Synod (Ottawa, June, 1874,) not a word of argument was advanced in support of the proposal to carry out the separation from the Church of Scotland, which had been begun in Canada in 1844. There were highly imaginative descriptions of ths harmony that was to exist; there were appeals ad captandum zmlgtis; denunciations of those who refused to give up their convictions and bow the knee to the majority; and a two hours' harangue from one of the leaders, who in tones of exaggerated solemnity declared that the voice of Gon had spoken so clearly with regard to this Basis (brand- ishing it in his hand) that whoever opposed its adoption, with every jot and tittle of its conditions, was fighting against Gon, and called down on these wicked men the wrath of the people, who are so readily swayed 1 y such fustian and claptrap. The fate of Korah, Dathan and Abiram was as nothing, compared to what their's should be who did not agree with the majority. But the Canada Presbyterian Church was not so well satisfied on the suliject, and insisted that in several very important points the Basis should be changed. For one thing, they demanded that a clause should be inserted as to the Headship of Christ, as a crucial test of the faith of those who were seeking to be united to them. They had made it a charge, the truth of which they constantly affirmed, that our Church had torn the Crown from the Saviour's brow, and was wallowing in Erastianism; and that clause, therefore, must be inserted as a guarantee that thenceforth, at least, she would maintain 23 sound doctrine on that point. It is true tliat in the rreaml)le, as thus proposed to be amended, the Scriptural definition of Clu'ist's Headship over the Church and the Nations was mutilated, to satisfy tlie United Presbyterian part of the Canada Presbyterian Church, so that it neither expressed the views of the Churcii of Scothmd, nor of the Free Church, yet nevertlieless it was agreed to, and, strange to say, the same orator who the niglit before had been declaiming so vehemently of the clear revelations regarding the first Basis, was equally emphatic, next forenoon, about the clearness of the new revelation ! One is tempted to believe that the descendants of Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah, who armed himself with horns of iron, to encourage Ahab to go up to Ramoth-Gilead and prosper, are not yet extinct. Then the managers of the scheme called frequent conferences between the two negotiating Churches about matters which would have been settled much more expedi- tiously and satisfactorily by a simple letter from the one Clerk to the other ; and at every one of these, which every member attended, there were sung the lines : — " Behold liow good a thing it is, And how becoming well, 'together such as brethren are In unity to dwell." veritable corps de theatre, to create a spurious excitement, and so to envelop the meetings of Synod with an atmosphere of unionism, that all sol)er and calm consideration should become impossil^le. The exegesis, too, of John xvii., 21, laid before congregations for nearly two years, was of the most fantastic kind, partaking largely of what is vulgarly but expressively called (waddle. This was continued in the Synod. One member of the Court, however, even in the full flare of his own ekxjuence, when, with extended arms, he declared his eager desire to embrace all Cliristians in one grand ecclesiastical organization, suddenly dropped from his flight, like Icarus, and explained that there, nevertheless, were limitations, for, he sai' the unfinished business could properly 1 -"ve been discussed, but in spite of law, it was resolved that the plain meaning and int>.nt of the words of the motion, "in terms of the Barrier Act," should be disregarded, aiJ that the report should be considered and decided upon, less tlian five months after i.^e Remit had Ijeen made, at an ailjourned meeting of the same .Synod at which the Basi; had been agreed on. The attendance at this adjourned meeting is a clear proof of the value of the assertitm as to the refusjil of members to attend. Out of 281 members win constituted the Synod, only 1 10 answered to their names from the first to the last diet, tlie peculiar mode of recording the Sederunt affording no evidence of the number present on any particular dav. It was evident when the Synod met, that the leaders were in a dilemma. The meeting at Ottawa had only been adjourned, not closed, and the Barrier Act precluded the Synod from taking up the Remit at the continuation of the same meeting. Dr. Snodgrass acted as Clerk in the absence of that official, and apparently took the whole direction of the proceedings, the Rev. John Rannie, Moderator, being confessedly ignorant of Church law. In order to make it appear that it was a new meeting, the Moderator, by direction of the Acting Clerk, conducted services exactly as he would have done at the regular opening of a newly convened Synod. These being ended, the first question that arose was as to the constitution of the Court. It was maintained by those who advocated the adoption of the constitutional course, that this being merely an adjourned meeting, the r>oll made up in June was the one still in force. On the advice of Dr. Snodgrass, the Moderator gravely and decorously ruled, that this being a Synod, and as Provincial Synods in Scotland met twice a year, making up a new roll at each meeting, there should be a new roll. Against this decision a dissent was entered. What the opinion of the Presbyteries of the Church was on this point was evident, as, with two exceptions, none of them had sent up certified rolls of their membership, the law bemg that these must be in the hands of the Synod Clerk at least four days before each new meeting of Synod. The action of the Canada Presbyterian Church was also proof to the same effect, as that body, which had agreed to meet at the same time, held its meeting as adjourned, and, therefore, a continuation of the one begun in Ottawa five months previously. Considerable confusion took place before the Court was constituted, there being evidently great doubt as to the course to be followed. It was^ however, finally constituted, and then the Presbyteries were ordered to meet and make up their rolls for transmission, against which proceeding, also, dissent was entered. Logically, according to this ruling, supported by the precedent of Provincial Synods in Scotland, the next step was the election of a new Moderator. A motion to that effect was made by the Constitutional party, but the Moderator, again prompted by the Acting Clerk, as gravely and decorously as before, ruled, that this being a Supreme Court, came under the laws regulating the proceedings of General Assemblies, and that, there- fore, the present Moderator should retain his seat, being elected for a year. It is not necessary to give in detail instances of the glaring violation of the laws of the Church in the conduct of that meeting. Every constitutional safeguard was ruthlessly trampled under foot, if it stood in the way, the idea evidently being that the minority, overawed by the bold front of those who had so far successfully managed their scheme, and terri- fied at the storm of public indignation which it was confidently believed had been excited against them, should they persist in their resolution to preserve their Church in existence, would abandon all resistance and let the case go by default. There is no other plausible theory to account for the illegalities committed at and subsequent to the .idjoumed meeting of Synod. Previous to the report being discussed, a solemn protest was served upon the Moderator, to protect those who refused to be bound by the decision of any majority, however large, and yet who considered it right to declare openly in the discussion their views on so important a question. The returns being called for, it was found that out of 150 charges and stations reported, only 95 had voted yea as compared with 114 in June, many of them under similar circumstances to those reported as "unanimously in favour of Union " in June. After long discussion, during which every constitutional objection 26 was set aside, and tlie laws of tlie Chiircli completely ignored, the vote was taken, show- ing that only 68 members could he induced to vote for the abolition of their Church, against which decision dissents were entered. Immediately on tliis vote being taken, a resolution was moved, setting out that it was clear from the leadings of Providence that the Union was in accordance with the Divine will, but adding the cautious condition, notwithstanding this clear indication, that the Union should only be entered into provided legislation could be obtained to transfer to those who were seceding the Funds and properties of the Church they were about to leave ! It was a fitting commentary on the course of some of the leaders, who, at the time of the secession of 1844, had remained in the Church only because they knew there was otherwise no hope of securing her property, or of sharing in the Clergy Reserves, but who now believed that times had changed, although they had not changed with them in their inward desires, and that they could safely secede without being out of })ocket. This is no rhetorical flourish, nor a malicious attempt to blacken the character of men " whose praise is in all the Churches." It is the plain statement of an ugly faci:, sus- ceptible of the clearest proof. "When the last resolutions were put, some declined to vote. It is said that as many as twenty did so. It is not easy U) decide with accuracy what was the exact number. But the leade. s of the seceding majority maintain that tlie statement is incorrect. If it be, what is the position of those who resolved to break up the Church, to transfer all its congregational and other properties to another body, and to strip from her members the means placed in their hands for the spread of the Gospel in this country? How can they justify themselves for depriving a faithful jieople of their Churches, which they had reared, literally in many cases, with their own hands ? We are told that there was the greatest enthusiasm for Union with the other body, and that this is full justification. Where is the proof of it ? Of all the members of the Synod, only a poor twenty-four per cent, ventured, or could be induced, the latter by the means 1 have pointed out, to vote for the absorption of the Church into a body with which there was nothing in com- mon, apart from their common Christianity, but the name Presbyterian, and with which there was no real sympathy. The Minutes of Synod themselves contain proof of the entire want of enthusiasm and spontaneity in the movement, which in reality was forced on by little more than half a dozen men, working in the dark to accomplish their own ends, and using others as their instruments, some actuated by vanity, some by self seeking, some by their total indifterence to the welfare of the Church into which they had been admitted, others by a sincere belief in the desirableness of the end set before them. No time was lost in having bills to secure the property of the Church laid before the Local Legislatures. In Toronto application was made to Chancery, to restrain the promoters of the bills from attempting to have them passed, but the Vice-Chancellor, on the plea that the Legislative Assembly was already "seized" of them and was bound to protect all interested, refused to interfere. As a proof of the manner in which the constitutional objections were met, I may cite that raised as to there being no Overture, but simply a letter suggesting the appointment of a Committee on L''nion from Dr. Or- miston, not a member of the Church. The real point was that there was no Overture, as required by our Church law, but this was evaded, and Dr. Snodgrass made affidavit that Overtures could be presented in various ways, giving instances in which they had been received and acted on, although not proceeding from an inferior Church Court, carefully concealing the fact that the letter referred to did not even profess to be an Overture, and was not written l)y a member of the Church, but by an official of another body writing unofficiidly, whereas the others were Overtures in the fullest meaning of the term. At a subsequent period, Mr. Mackerras, a professor in (^)ueen's College, went still further. In giving his evidence at Cornwall, under oath, he stated : I. That an Overture was simply a petition ; that the Synod received petitions from any one ; that they had, among others, received petitions from Temperance Societies. 2. That the laws of the Church of Scotland did not apply to the branch of that Church here ; although, as a matter of fact, these are the only laws we have, modified, however, in a few cases by special Acts of Synod, as, for instance, the change in the Barrier Act, already alluded to, • ., 27 In Ontario, the bills were forced through the Private Bills Committee with scant ceremony, and passed in the Assembly without discussion. In (^hiebec, much more time was given to their examination, they being only carried in the Private Hills Committee of the Assembly Ijy two of a majority. In the Committee of the Legislative Council they were thrown out, the preamble being declared not proved, but pressure was brought by some of his supporters upon the Premier, v.ho brought the whole influence of the Gov- ernment to bear to have the bills reconr.nilted, and they were then passed through Com- mittee by a majority of two, se"p'Pl members, who had not been jiresent when the evidence was heard being brought in to carry the bills. The general effect of the bills was to declare that all Congregations were in the Union, whether they had been con- sulted or not; that to extricate themselves from the Union, there must be the vote of a majority of all the members entitled to vote in Congregations, not the majority at a meeting, however large, if it fell short of an absolute majority of all the members, present or absent; \hat in spite of Trust deeds. Congregational title deeds, Charters or Acts of Incorporation, all Church and Congregational i)roperties were to be transferred to the new body, no provision being made for the religious necessities of those who declined to abandon their own Church, even in cases in which, and these were far from uncommon, those who refused had contributed the whole, or very nearly the whole, cost of their Churches. A pretence was made that the rights of minorities were protected, but this simply meant that the Ministers who had been entitled to the Clergy Reserves, and who were donors to the Temporalities' Fund, on condition of receiving a life annuity, were not to be deprived of that annuity if they did not enter the new organization, but they were deprived of all share in its management by a special clause preventing them from being members of the Board. For minorities in Congregations there was not even a pretence of protection, and the Acts were subsequently so interpreted, that whole Con- gregations refusing to enter the new body were deprived of their jiroperties under cover of their provisions. There was also a clause providing for constant agitation in Con- gregations which refused to leave their Church, no vote being final which stopped short of carrying the property into the Union Church, but any chance vote, or no vote, as was held, being sufficient to set aside the title deeds of Congregations, and to bind their churches, manses, glebes, &c., irrevocably to the new law-created ecclesiastical organi- zation, to resist which, we are gravely told, is to be guilty of rebellion against legally constituted authority. VIII. Acts were thus passed by the Local Legislatures, disposing of the Funds and pro- perties of the Church and Congregations. They were, in reality, Acts of Uniformity, visiting with the penalty of confiscation those who did not choose to abandon their own Church. There was the singular anomaly witnessed, in a British Colony which had professedly got rid of the slightest semblance of the connection between Church and State, of a specially-privileged, law-created ecclesiastical body, professing a detestation of the principles of the Church of Scotland, to which the mendjcrs of that Church must adhere, if they desired, even in name, to retain the instrumentalities for the maintenance of their distinctive beliefs, which at a great sacrifice they had secured, as they fondly hoped, for themselves and their descendants. It was the exercise of despotism under colour of law, unexampled since August, 1692 (Black Bartholomew's day), and on the plea that the will of a majority is omnipotent. The numbers were not so great as then, but the principle was the same. From one end of the Dominion to the other the state- ment was circulated in every form, that the whole body of Presbyterians had agreed to unite, and that this praiseworthy desire was sought to be frustrated by a few pestilent fellows, who had set themselves to oppose the carrying out of this great object. The fact was most carefully concealed, that for years the seceders from the Church of Scot- land had been fighting for her overthrow in this country ; that their bitterness had been intensified rather than allayed by the lapse of time, that the demand for union on the 28 part of the seceders was only used to carry out their determination to remove every vestige of her existence and to secure in this way her funds and properties. The pecuHar conditions as to the recognition of her colleges, as compared with the terms used in relation to the colleges of the other body, were very significant of the intention of the latter to get rid of (Queen's and Morrin Colleges, and to appropriate their endowments to the colleges of the Canada Presbyterian Church. Nor was there much concealment on this point. With a charming candour the design was openly spoken of, not discussed, for it seemed to be beyond the realm of discussion, and to have arrived at the dignity of a settled decision. The continued existence of the Synod of our Church, sadly weakened in numbers, as it has been, by the secession of so many of its members, has hitherto prevented the final steps towards this end from being taken, but that the plan has been postponed only, not abandoned, is very plain from, amongst other indications, the Over- ture presented to the General Assembly of the new body, and the statement, with all the weight which the editorial form could give it, in the official organ of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, of the endowments of the different colleges, showing the great efficiency which might be gained by shutting up Queen's College and transferring the endowments and the money arising from the sale of the property, to Knox College, Toronto, and the Theological Hall at Montreal, belonging to the Canada Presbyterian Church. The only plea, the official organ added, which Queen's College could urge for being allowed to exist was her age and prestige. All along, the press had been used with the greatest possible effect, to make it appear that the proposal for outward uniformity arose from the spontaneous desire of the people to unite, and in one great outflow of brotherly love, to get rid of all past differences. Yet the articles had a suspiciously close resemblance in style, tone of thought and line of appeal. They certainly bore the mark, the greater part of them at least, of being con- tributed from one central point. The members of our Church had no opportunity of answering, their replies being refused admission, or if admitted, a sting was usually added editorially to the communication, and when the few who had openly and boldly taken their stand in defence of their Church were spoken of, it was with a sneer or a con- temptuous remark. Yet, outwardly weak as they were, they were cheered and suppoited by numerous letters from every part of the country, asking for advice, counsel and guid- ance, these letters affording the strongest possible proof that there were many left with an ardent and undiminished love for their Church. Much as that small band who stood forward to oppose the popular will may have been sneered at and despised, they showed a heroism and an unselfish devotion that may some day be recognized in its true light. To give greater lustre to the ceremony, it had been arranged that the Supreme Courts of the different negotiating Churches should meet in Montreal, and there effect the Union, in the Victoria Skating Rink. The efforts to attract attention and to excite the popular enthusiasm were not relaxed, but were, on the contrary, increased. The newspapers were filled with the most glowing anticipations of the crowds that were to flock to the Skating Rink, of the processions of Sunday School children, of the picturesque proceedings, of the cheap excursions, of the great numerical strength that was to be gained by the junction of the different bodies. But it was remarkable that greater stress seemed to be laid upon the political influence, rather than on the spiritual power to be hoped for from the increased numbers. There were frequent comparative statements of the members of the new Presbyterian body, and those of the Roman Catholic, the English and Methodist Churches, and the boast was not seldom made, that the voice of so strong a body coidd not be disregarded by legis- lators.* In truth it was evident to the thinking onlooker, that the worm was already at the root of the seemingly flourishing tree, and the thought involuntarily occurred to * The following may be taken as an instance of this spirit of boasting : " We belong to a Church now happily united, having eight hundred Ministers and Missionaries, embracing a constituency of six hundred thousand, and covering an area stretching from Newfoundland to the Rocky Mountains."— Extract from the Address of the Presbytefian Church in Canada to t/w Marquis of Lome on his landing at Halifax, Is it worth pointing out that the figures do not err on the side of moderation ? They are, in fact, more like those given in the prospectus of a projected railway, with its glowing antici- pations of profits. 29 many, that the boasted strength of the new organization, and the unthinking applause of the multitude, presaged a similar fate to that of Ilcrod, when the people shouted, "It is the voice of a god, and not of a man." And immediately, the Holy Record says, the Angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not GoD tbe Glory. For there was a levity in the conduct of those who were intent on breaking up the Church to which they had belonged, and whose destruction they believed they had secured, which was not becoming, even had the members unanimously agreed that duty to the cause of Christ required the sacrifice of personal inclination, and the closing of the history of a Church which had done so much for the spread of the Gospel in this land. In June, 1875, the Supreme Courts of the negotiating Churches, from Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia met in Montreal, a large proportion of the members of the Synod of tlie Maritime Provinces, in connection with the Church of Scotland, besides those of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, refusing to attend. On the faces of the Free Churcli party might be seen a grim sense of the humour of the situation. They had for years been trying in vain, by open hostility, to concjuer the liranch of the Church of Scotland. Suddenly reversing their tactics, they had gained by strategy, with the help of friends within the citadel, what they could not otherwise have succeded in winning — the apparently complete subjugation of the Church from which they had seceded. What mattered to them the slight change of name to which they had agreed ? In their short history of thirty years they had been known under various aliases, whereas the expunging from our title tire words, "In connection with the Church of Scotland," was a revolutionary change, resisted uncompromisingly in 1844, which indicated on the part of those who left us the complete severance of the tie that had bound them to the Mother Church. That was, and is, the true meaning of the change of name, in spite of all the quibbling pleas that may be used to conceal the fact. The Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, met in St. Paul's Church, instead of St. Andrew's, as had hitherto been the custom, a change not without meaning. In spite of circulars, appeals both personal and written, the persistent advertising of the greatness of the occasion, and the real importance of the event, only a fraction of the members answered to their names, including those who appeared at the opening of the Synod and then returned home, and those who came towards the last. Very properly. Dr. Snodgrass, convener of the Union Committee, who had been prominent in framing the Acts of the Legislatures, by which it was hoped to render helpless the members of the Church to which he belonged, was appointed Moderator. As showing the confusion that had been introduced by the attempt to override the laws of the Church at the adjourned meeting of Synod in November, it is worthy of notice, that there had been no election of representative elders since then, and that, therefore, according to the laws of the Church, not one of the elders was legally entitled to a seat in the Court. The law on the subject is very explicit. Within two months after the closing of a Synod, the representative elders for the Presbytery and next Synod must be elected by Kirk Sessions. The representative elder at the Synod may retain his seat in Presbytery for two months after the closing of Synod, if a successor be not previously elected ; Init, on the expiry of two months, his representative character absolutely ceases, whether a successor has been elected or not, and he cannot therefore legally vote in Presbytery or Synod without re-election. The Synod of 1874, begun at Ottawa in June, and adjourned, was formally closed in November at Toronto. At the adjourned meeting, held in Toronto, the new Roll was illegal, because the elections had taken place before the Synod closed. In Montreal, in June, 1875, the Roll was again illegal, because no election had taken place after the Synod closed. All the proceedings were, therefore, null. But although the brute force of a majority of those present could get rid of this or of any other obstacle that stood in the way of the leaders, there was yet an uneasy feeling among their followers, that there were breakers ahead which it required some caution to avoid. Common sense might have shown that to legalize the formation of a body whose powers were to extend over the Dominion, one general Act was absolutely 30 necessary, not unconnected Acts, widely differing in tlieir provisions. It was by the latter process, however, that a homogeneous l)ocly was attempted to be formed by provisions of the most heterogeneous character. Uy the Union Act in Ontario, the claims of those who had been declared entitled to annuities from the Temporalities' Fund, were to lapse at their death, when the capital was to become the properly of the new body. The Union Act of (Quebec contained the following provision : " Whereas the Ministers of the said Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, are entitled to receive incomes from a fund called the Tem- poralities' Fund, administered by a Board incorporated by statute of the heretofore Province of Canada, and it is proposed to preserve to them, and to their successors, even IF the Congrci^ations oz'er which they preside do not enter into the Union, the income which they derive from the said fund; it is therefore enacted," &c. Nothing could be clearer. It was determined by the Private Bills Committee that the rights to the Fund of the Congregations of the Church of Scotland in the Province of Quebec should be preserved, and that such Congregations, existing at the time oj the Union, to use the words of a subsequent part of the section, should be entitled, in accordance with the terms above cited, to enjoy in perpetuity the advantages of the par- tial endowment secured by means of the Temporalities' Fund, whether they joined the new Church or not. Much dissatisfaction was felt at the distinction thus made between the two Provinces, and to satisfy the discontented, it was resolved to obtain Opinion of Counsel. For this purpose a case was prepared, signed by the Church Agent, which, amongst other things, stated that "the word EVEN coming after the word 'successors,' near the beginning of the above section (that just quoted) was not in the draft of the bill as originally drawn, hut got in through some error,''' The statement I have italicized is entirely incorrect. The clause was deliberately inserted by the Private Bills Com- mittee, after hearing the evidence and arguments on both sides, and in spite of the most urgent demands on the part of the promoters of the bill, the Committee positively refused to change the wording of the clause. Apparently it was not difficult to obtain an oj)inion that the words did not mean what they so clearly expressed. In that obtained from Mr. Strachan Bethune, Q. C, it was gravely laid down that the words must be read in a non-natural sense, and thus treated, it seems that they could be made to mean anything the Church Agent wanted. Intelligent men, not honoured with the silk gown, might not unnaturally characterize the opinion as nonsense, but this would only have shown their ignorance of the fine subtleties of the higher branches of law, as simple lovers of ballad music might show their want of training in trying to criticise the music of Bach or Wagner. The Opinion is worth quoting, but the exact words of the Act must be borne in mind ; Mr. Bethune says : " It is obvious that if we attach to the expression, ' even if,' in said iith clause, its literal meaning, we shall entirely defeat the main object and intent the Legislature had in view in passing the other Act; and if, on the contrary, 7iv so Tary the natural and common import of these xoords, as to make them read as the word ' if ' alone (regarding the expression ' even ' as introduced to emphasize or strengthen the expression ' //"'), we harmonize the provisions generally of both Acts, instead of defeating the entire object of one of them." " And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die." The leaders must have been driven to desperate straits, when they exhibited such an Opinion as one that ought to satisfy reasonable men. Some of their followers were not satisfied. The Rev. Mr, McLean, of Belleville, and Rev. Mr. Campbell, of Renfrew, moved a resolution for delay, to have this and other discrepancies rectified, and supported their proposal in speeches of great ability. There seemed little doubt that the resolution would have carried, but between the adjournment for dinner and the reassembling in the evening, new light appeared to have dawned on the two gentlemen, who suddenly withdrew the resolution. The emphatic declaration of Mr. John L. Morris, during the discussion. 31 that he was not afraid of going to law, created some amusement. It would have been wonderful if he had, as few lawyers are greatly averse to the fees arising from a " gude gangin' plea."* To enter into the details of the proceeilings is unnecessary. A few salient points may be taken. The reports by the members of the deputation that had appeared before the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland were varied in their character, but there could be detected running through all a tone of dissatisfaction at their rccejUion, which the " prave 'orts " of the delegates could not conceal; there were elaborate attempts to twist the words of the fmdinff of the General Assem])Iy into an appnival of the conduct of those who were contemplating a severance of the connection with the Mother Church, but it was a palpable failure. There was evidently no heart in the movement, all tiie efforts of the managers of the scheme being necessary to obtain a vote in its favour. The Kev. \V. M. black (now of Anwoth, Scotland), one of the most retiring and diffident of men, expressed the mind of the great majority of the members of Synod, when, imi)elled by sincere conviction, he earnestly pleaded for delay in the interests of religion itself. There was a moment in which the scale seemed trembling in the balance, but the time for supporting his proposition was allowed to pass by those who had hitherto suffered themselves to be drifted on the current, and the words of those who had taken a pronounced part in (jpj)ositi()n would not be heeded. The motion to proceed with the steps for the consmnmation of the Union was carried by the votes of 90 members, much less than one-third of the whole Synod, against which resolution dissents were entered. On the 14th of June the final vote, to repair to the Skating Rink to consummate the Union, was proposed, which contained a clause, that the Synotl " Does at the same time declare that the United Church shall be considered identical with the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Churcli of Scotland, and shall possess the same authority, rights, privileges and benefits to which this Church is now entitled, excepting such as have been reserved by Acts of Parliament.'''' Which italicised phrase means, that the new brethren were only to enjoy pecuniary benefits after the death of the gentlemen who were so liberally, in appearance, throwing everything open. The meaning of the whole clause was to cover up the fact of the secession from the connection with the Church of Scotland, and that that, ipso /acta, deprived all those who seceded of any of the benefits which they were declaring, under reserves, they were conveying to sundry other Churches ! The minutes record that the motion was carried by an overwhelming majority, against an amendment moved and seconded by two members who had steadily voted with the leaders. Had the figures been given, they would have shown that a mere fraction voted in support of the final resolution. The following dissent was, therefore, laid on the table : "We, Ministers and Elders, members of this Synod, heartily attached to the Church, hereby dissent from the resolution of this Court to repair to the Victoria Hall for the * The difficulty of drawing a distinction of persons in dual offices is not new. Peter de Dreux, Prince Bishop of Beauvais, was taken prisoner, when fighting at the head of his troops, by Richard Ccuur de Lion. When Pope Celestin demanded that he should, as a son of the Church, be delivered up to His Holiness, the Lion Hearted sent for answer the prisoner's coat of mail with the pertinent enquiry : "Know now whether this be thy son's coat or no?" It is not more easy, in the modern instance, to recognise, in the childlike and simple representative elder at the Synod, who did not fear law, having no idea of its " ways that are dark and tricks that are vain," with the sharp legal gentleman who wrote the following letter a few days after the Court of Appeal had given effect to a technical quibble, interposed merely for the sake of delay, and having no bearing, in even the most remote degree, on the ultimate decision of the claims of the Church to retain its patrimony : 353 Notre Dame Street Dear Sir, , , . Montreal, 39 December, 1878. Dobie vs Temporalities Board ct nl The costs due under the judgment lately rendered dismissing Plaintiff^s action not having been paid I beg to inform you that unless paid to-day I will take legal proceedings against you as one of tne sureties. Yours obediently John L, Mokkis Attorney for Defts. 32 purpose of consummating the proposed Union with the other Presbyterian bodies, and thereby to form the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada. We further protest against the declaration that the United Church shall be considered identical with the i'resbytcrian Church of Canada, in connectitm with the Church of Scotland, inasmuch as this Synod has no ])ower per saltiim to declare other bodies in addition to itself Ui be possessed of the rights, privileges and benefits to which this Church is now entitled. We declare, therefore, our continued attachment to the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, and do herel)y enter our protest against the empowering of th(^ present Moderator to sign in its name the Preamble and I5asis of Union and tiie Resolutions connected therewith. And, further, we. Ministers and Elders of the .Synod, holding views opposed to Union on the present basis, do protest against the carrying out of the contem])lated arrangements for the consummation of the proposed Union, and declare that, if consummated, we will claim and continue to be the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in Connection with the Church of Scotland. "Ror.KRT DoiiiE, *'Wm. Simtson, " RODKKl' ISUKNK'I', " Dav. Watson, "j. s. muli.an, " Wm. McMillan, "Thomas McPiikkson, " RODK.KICK McCRIMMON, "John D/ v'idson, "John Macdonald." The way being thus, as it appeared, clear for deserting the ship, the work of plundering the wreck began. First, Dr. Cook, of Quebec, had a I5y-law of the Temporalities' Board produced and read, granting Morrin College, (Quebec, $850 a year out of the Temporalities' Fund, which, after being discussed, was carried by 56 votes against 28, showing only 84 members present, a very small proportion of the Synod. As usual, the minutes contain no numbers. Next, one hundred and twelve Ministers, Missionaries and Probationers were put on the list, in addition to the legal recipients, as entitled to receive incomes from the Temporalities' Fund of the Church they were leaving. Very few of those foisted on the list, even had they remained by the Church, were entitled to one dollar from the Fund, their only claim being on the Sustentation Fund, which had been raised annually as a supplementary endowment, and was discon- tinued at the secession then taking place. The resolution was simply a bribe to obtain support, or to w .'aken opposition. It may be well to notice that no one can receive payment of his cliecjue, except by declaring himself a minister of the Church from which he has seceded. Can such a declaration, by any casuistry, be regarded as true ? The Professors of Queen's College had resolved that their exertions to break up the Church, for whose service the College was supposed to be maintained, should not go imrewarded. Their course is worthy of very special notice, as it is a key to the bitter hatred some of them have shown to the members of our Church since the seces- sion. The Synod had agreed that an annual allowance of two thousand dollars should be made to Queen's College out of the Temporalities' Fund, the allowance to commuting Ministers, being professors, to form part of this. After Dr. Snodgrass assumed the office of Principal, an attempt was made to obtain the two thousand dollars, phis the allowance to the commuting ministers, and the following is the Minute of the Board on the subject : — " 1st. — That the commutation of stipend, whether made by Ministers having charges, or being Professors, having been personal, the stipend derived from it should continue to be enjoyed by those who commuted while they continue in the service of the Church, whether in charges or in the College. "2nd.— In the event of there being Commuting Ministers in Queen's College, whose stipends together amount to ;^5oo per annum ($2,000) no additional payment shall be made by the Board. •'3rd. — In the event of there not being Coninuitinjj Ministers in the Collei^e receiving salary from the Hoard to the amount of /"500 i)er annum, llic Hoard shall make up the ileticiency." The report of the Temporalities' Hoard for 1874-5 was presented in manuscript on the 8th of June, and transmitted to a small committee. Notiiing more was iicard of it till the 14th, the day before the secession took place, when, on tiie recommendation of the committee that it be .adopted, it was .agreed to without discussion. No member, beyond the privileged few, had the slightest idea that it contained a Hy-law, to which the sanction of the .Synod had unwittingly been given, which gave to each Ministerial Professor the sum to which lie would have been entitled as a conmuitor, or which he might claim on any other plea, besides the two thousand dollars to the College itself, .as had been provided by the .Synod. The effect of liie l>y-law was, that an additional sum of $1,950 annually was taken from the Temporalities' I-'und, namely, to Professor Mowat, $450; to Professor Williamson, $450; to Professor Mackerras, $450; to Pro- fessor Ferguson, $400, and to Principal Snodgrass, $200. I'urther, Dr. Snodgrass, acting for the others, had managed to have a clause insertcfl in the (^)uel)ec Act, jirovid- ing for " the annual receipt of two thousand dollars, in fycrpctiiity, by tlu- Treasurer of (Queen's College, for the use and benefit of said College." In providing for the transfer of the capital to the new Church, the two thousand dollars to (Queen's College were specially exempted, .and, according to the Act, "the Po.ard shall have power, at any time after the passing of the said Act, to capit.ilize the same and p.ay it over to the Treasurer of Queen's College, for the use and benefit of the said College. "' To make assurance doubly sure, that the Professors were to put tlie additional .annual allowance in their own pockets, without regard to their .agreement with the Trustees, a clause hail been inserted in the Quebec Act, several months before the formal sanction of the Synod could have been obtained, which was necessary to make the By-law valid. This I give in full: "Provided also, that nothing contained in this Act shall be so construed as to deprive any Professor in Queen's College of any right to partici]iate in the said Tem- poralities' Fund, to which, as a Minister of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in con- nection with the Church of Scotland, he would have been entitled had he continued in the active duties of the Ministry of the said Church." These facts throw a flood of light upon the sordid motives that, under the name of religion, actuated those who were entrusted with the training of young men for the Ministry of our Church. They need no comment. The rest of the story may be briefly summed up. On the 15th of June, 1875, when every preparation had been made to repair to the Skating Kink, a notarial protest, with all the solemn forms of such a process in the Province of Quebec, was served en the Moderator. The Notary, attended by the necessary witnesses, stood up in sight of all and read the Protest in an audible voice. Business was suspended ; every eye was fixed on the officer of the Law, with one very remarkable exception. The Clerk of the Synod, sitting in his place in front of the Moderator, had no idea that such a document had been read, and no notice is taken of it in the minutes, although as usual in such cases, the Protest was served in writing, after having been audibly read. It is another won- derful proof of how much stranger is truth than fiction ! Shortly after this the Moderator, Rev. Dr. Snodgrass, rose and headed the seceders, who flocked down the aisles, leaving behind those who, true to their convictions, had remained faithful to their Church. To the one it seemed a small thing to desert a Church to which they owed everything. To judge from their faces, they were going oft" in mere gaiete de caiir ; walking on the sunny side of the street with Religion in her silver slip- pers, and the people applauding. To the other it was a solemn and trying occasion. Even at the last moment attempts were made to cajole, to terrify, to induce by any or every motive those who remained to disobey the voice of conscience. They saw many going off who, too timid to strive against wind and tide, had yielded to the temptation to be on the winning side; they saw themselves regarded with bitterness; heard them- 34 selves spoken of with conlcmpt; were sejiavnted from many with whom they had in hy- tjonc years taiieii sweet counsel. They knew not what were tlieir i)ros|)ects of support for themselves, their wives and families. Nor were they Imoyecl up by momentary excitement. Supported by a sense of duly, they did not shrink from the task before them. Months before, every step to follow the threatened secession had been arrantjed. 'The la-it of the seceders had not left the pews, when calmly the remanent mendjers of Synod elected as Moderator tlu' Uev. Robirl Dobie, who had on a previous occasion tilled the Moderator's chair, and appointed as Clerk the Rev. Robert Hurnet, Closing up the ranks, they proceeded to hnish the business, and not until that was done flid the Synod close. There has been no break in the continuity of its existence. Since the secession in June, 1875, 'he Synod, l'resl)yterics and Kirk Sessions have continued their work, and are yrailually i)ul steadily ji;rowi' ',, addinj; to their nundjers, extorting respect even from those who ditfer from them. " I'aint yet pursuing," they look forward undis- mayed to the trials they may yet have to endure, for even now the dark clouds are breaking by which they have so long been surrouniled. I\. Had the object of this work been merely !o dcline the legal position of the members of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, and to discuss solely and exclusively tin- legal objections to llie /Vets of Union, Hcc, it might easily have been conlined within much narrower bounds. h'or the (piestion really turns not upon nund)ers, nor upon the manner in which the voles in .Synod were taken, but upon the inler|)relation of Trust and Title Deeds, and upon the powers of Legislatures to revoke them. As, however, great stress has been laid ail along upon the will of majorities, it has lieen thought well to show thai these pretended majorities were really minorities, so far as the Church Courts were concerned, and that in respect to the votes of Congregations, no real returns were ever made, the reports transmitted to Synod being fallacious and misleading. it was also thought desirable to lay bare some of the secret springs of the movement, and to expose the manner in which the leaders contrived to carry out a scheme, which can only be described correctly as a clerical intrigue. It cannot be loo emphatically rei)eated, that in a case of this kind majorities do not decide. The Trust and Title Deeds must be inter])reted, wliere ecclesiastical interests are concerned, no more and no less strictly than any other ordinary Trust and Title Deeds. In the (irsl chapter, 1 (|uoted the words of the I'iedmontese Envoy addressed to the Court of Rome, but a sentence will bear repetition : "As nothing can be more strictly secular than property movable or immovable, together with its proceeds, so its nature is not a whit changed by its being connected with an ecclesiastical office." Which is good, sound law. When an attempt was made to unite the Free and United Presbyterian Churches in Scotland, so as more effectually to attack the Church of Scotland, Dr. 15egg and his friends obtained Opinion of Counsel from the most eminent men at the Scotch ]iar, who unanimously declared, that "no majority, however large," could transfer the property of the Free Church to the new body proposed to be constituted by the Union. But there is much more than Opinion of Counsel to rely upon. There has been since 1813, a series of decisions in .Scotland, conlirmed by the Privy Council, on cases very similar to the one now under consideration ; the judgments since that date have been invariable— no majority, however large, desirous to change the terms of ecclesiasti- cal trusts, has been able to do so in the face of a hostile mincn-ity. In the Kirkintilloch case, in which the majority of a congregation refused to enter on a Union decided by 35 the Synod, tlic judpmcnl was unanimously tlmi no sinh io>ioliition coulfl cnmi^cl tlie congrccation to enter llic I'nion, or forfeit its i.iopeily. I'lie s:une rule a|i|ilies where those ohjcctint; in a congrepalion arc a minority. In the 'lliurso case, the Court unani- mously held that "The princijjjc recognized l)y the Court in ('niiRier'. Marshall is founded on the contract of parties in relation to which the trust of the jirojierty iielonninj,' to the con- grcRational l)(,dy was constituted, and its lepal lonse^iuences which secure those strictly adhering to it from being alt'ected in their rights by the acts of those who would innovate uuun its terms and purposes 'I'he principle takes the case out of the class to he rided by the voice of a majority. Acccuding to its obvious s])irit, the like circumstancffc and reasons which are of sufficient potency to entitle an adhering ane?- aversionem, upon a treaty as to the terms of this union. The very necessity of a treaty between the two Synods demonstrates that it is net a case of extension by the one or the other, to be ac- complished in its own will. . . . Therefore I am of opinion, withoul^inquiry as to the extent of the difference in principle between the United Secession Church and the Relief Church, that as the act of union, or the serious entertaining of a treaty for it, im- ported a change in the constitution of this congregation, there was no competency in the Synod of the Secession Church to force this congregation into such a union, or to infer a forfeiture of the property by their refusal to go into it." Then there was the legally absurd resolution carried by the seceding members of the Synod of our Church, previous to their leaving: "That the United Church shall be con- sidered identical with the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, and shall possess the same authority, rights, privileges and benefits to which this Church is now entitled," Lord Curriehill says on this point, in his judg- ment delivered a few months ago, on the Reformed Presbyterian Case, in which not only had a similar declaration been made when the majority joined the Free Church, but where they had colourably retained the distmctive name of the Synod for civil pur- poses, so as to prevent the adherents of the Church from making good their claim to the property : '* It is impossible for me in the present case to hold that the Reformed Presbyterian Church, by uniting with the Free Church, did not virtually abandon their distinctive fun- damental principles. I am not moved by the fact that, in order to retain their patrimon- ial rights in the Churches, the majority when they united with the Free Church, retained their corporate name of the Reformed Presbyterian Synod, quoad civilia, because I think that a minority of any one of these congregations could have debito tempore vindicated the property of such congregation from the majority uniting with the Free Church." It will, of course, be contended that in these cases there had been no legislation confirming the action of the Church Courts and rendering valid what, otherwise, was liable to be set aside. It has been maintained, besides, that the Courts will not go be- yond the Acts of the Legislature, or ask whether the Statutes to be adjudicated upon were obtained properly or improperly, or the resolutions of the Church Courts arrived at in consistency with, or in violation of the laws of the Church. Without discussing the truth of these latter pretensions, it may be well to look at the true state of the case, as respects the claim of members of the Church to dissolve the connection and yet retain its benefits. It has been shown : 1. With respect to the Temporalities' Fund, that it was originally derived from the clainis of the members of the Church of Scotland on the Clergy Reserves, being admitted as of equal weight with those of the members of the Church of England; that the share of the Clergy Reserves was not given to Presbyterians but to members of the Church of Scotland, who were admitted to the benefits of the Clergy Reserves, on the ground of the Synod here being a branch of one of the National Churches, and as such bound to provide relig^us ordinances for the members of that Church coming from Scotland, as well as for those already in Canada. 2. That, therefore, the Endowment for the Church was not at the disposal of any chance majority, subject to be swayed by passing excitement, or by the acts of clerical or lay demagogues, but was intended to be held by that Church for the benefit of all who might choose to seek its benefits in the Church, but not to be diverted by those who might think fit to leave its communion after having been admitted as members. 37 3- That by the commutation of tlie Clergy Reserves, the amounts tliencc arising became by Imperial and Provincial legislation the private property of the beneficiaries. 4. That the individual beneficiaries constituted the Temporalities' Fund a perman- ent Endowment for the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, the donors entirely divesting themselves of all right to resume the capital of the Fund or to revoke the Trust thus created. 5. That whilst the donors, by an express contract, became entitled to a life annuity from the ra'enues of the Temporalities' Fund, to be paid before any other claim could be admitted, they bound themselves down to give up their right to this annuity in case of, frofh any cause, severing their connection with the Church for whose benefit the Trust was constituted. 6. That, by the Act of Incorporation, the Trust was constituted for the benefit of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of vScotland, and not for the Ministers of that Church, but for the whole organization, those seceding from it, be they few or many, ceasing to have any claim to the benefit of the revenues, according to the terms of the contract, as recognized in the Act of Incorporation, and, therefore, a fortiori, incapable of taking possession of the capital. 7. That the Act of Incorporation provided that no inroad should be made on the Capital Fund, and that to meet additional claims arising from the extension of the Church, a supplementary fund should be raised, and, if necessary, annual subscriptions obtained. 8. That only the surplus of the revenues was to be applied to other purposes than the payment of the privileged beneficiaries, the whole income, if necessary, being secured for their annuities. 9. That the claim for any benefit from the revenues of the Fund was based entirely on the official connection of the recipients with the Church for whose l)enefit the Trust was created, the severance of that connection ipso facto involving the forfeiture of the benefit even in the case of the donors by whose money the Fund was constituted. It follows, therefore, incontestably, that if the donors cannot revoke the Trust, still less can those who subsequently became entitled to a share of the benefits of the surplus revenues, on complying with the conditions of the Trust, and far less those who, belong- ing to other religious organizations, in no sense could pretend to claim any share in the Fund, or its revenues, and who had no locus standi before the Legislatures, to demand that the Capital of the Fund should be transferred to them and to those who by joining them had, in accordance with the terms of the Trust, ceased to have any right to enjoy the benefits thence derived, the words of the contract with the donors being, " that they shall cease to have any claim on, or be entitled to, any share of said Commutation Fund, whenever they shall cease to be Ministers in connection with the said Church." In discussing the constitutionality of the Acts by which the properties of the Pres- byterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, and those of her congregations, were transferred to another religious organization, I shall confine myself to the Temporalities' P'und as a matter of convenience, although the same reason- ing will apply to congregational properties, and in even a stronger sense to the Charter of Queen s College. Nor shall I touch upon the special disabilities of the Local Legis- latures to deal with such subjects, leaving that more technical ground to be discussed in the Courts of Law. It has been laid down by Mr. Justice Story, of the Supreme Court of the United States, "That unless a power be reserved for this purpose, the Crown cannot, in virtue of its prerogative, alter or amend the charter, or divest the corporation of any of its franchises, or add to them, or add to, or diminish, the number of the Trustees, or remove any of the members, or control the administration, or compel the incorporation to receive a new charter. " He adds, that the corporation may forfeit its corporate franchises, by misuse or nonuse of them. Lord Mansfield says: " After forfeiture duly found, the 38 King may re-grant the franchises; but a grant of franchises already granted, and of which no forfeiture has been found, is void. Corporate franchises can only be forfeited by trial and judgment," Has any forfeiture been found in this case ? If so, it would surely have been recited in the jireamble to the Act to transfer the corporate franchises of the Temporalities' Board to another body. What, however, do we find ? The preamble to the Act says : " Whereas ])y Petition it hath been represented, that the Synods of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, of the Church of the Maritime Provinces, in connection with the Church of Scotland, of the Presbyterian Church of the Lower Provinces, and the Cieneral Assembly of the Canada Presbyterian Church, have agreed to unite together and to form one body or denomination of Christians, under the name of the 'Presbyterian Church in Canada,' and that the 'Act to incorporate the Board for the management of the Temporalities' Fund of the Presby- terian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland,' and amendments thereto, required to be amended with a view to such union," &c. And thereupon it is enacted that the Act of Incorporation shall be totally changed, so as to give the new body the control and reversion of funds, which the original Act declared should remain in iierjictuity as n.n endowment for the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with tlie Church of Scotland, and for it alone. There seems to be as dense an ignorance in Canada as to the differences between Presbyterians generally and the adherents of the Church of Scotland, as there is in the British Isles between Americans generally and Canadians. The country now known ns the United States consisted originally of thirteen colonies, which for reasons sufficient to themselves severed their connection with the Mother Country, and thereby ceased to have the benefit of the Fisheries of the Provinces now forming the Dominion of Canada. At various times secessions took place from the Church of Scotland, by which those seceding lost certain privileges attaching to the connection with that Church, among others to the enjoyment of the Clergy l\eserves, which the law declared to be intended solely for the benefit of the National Churches of the Empire. These seceding Churches are as distinct ecclesiastically from the Church of Scotland, and her adherents in this country, as the United States are distinct politically from the British Empire, and have as little right to enjoy the revenues of the branch of the Church of Scotland here, on the ground of being I'resbyterians, as the United States have to demand the enjoyment of our Fisheries, on the ground that we are all Americans, because we all inhabit the American Continent. The one pretension is no more and no less absurd than the other. In the Church case the Acts simply carry into practical effect the disendowment of the Church of Scotland here, under pretence of a Union, which is demanded with such virulence in Scotland by the seceding Churches there, without that pretence. In Canada, the seceding Presbyterians apiiear to have been unanimous in demanding that the funds and properties of the branch of the Church of Scotland should be transferred to the new organization, whereas in the S^ nod of the Church in connection with the Church of Scotland only 68 members out of 281 could be found te from ordinary Christian men. Possibly they think themselves entitled to " benefit of clergy." 42 I have already shown how the returns to Synod of the votes in congregations were made up. But, besides that, it must be borne in mind that the churches were built and the other properties acquired by adherents of the Church of Scotland, and that the title- deeds are clear and posuivi' as to the real proprietorship, which is vested solely in memVjers and adherents of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, in connection with the Church of Scotland, as strongly as the Temporalities' Fund is bound to that Church. But as the object of that Church, as of all others worthy of the name, is to spread the (jospel everywhere, her doors were open to receive all who chose to seek admission, and on their profession the Lord's Table was open to them aS communicants. Becoming members in tliis way, they were entitled to vote on matters affecting the internal affairs of the congregation, and on such other questions of management as are usually decided by majorities. But this gave them no right to attempt to wrest the properties from the rightful owners, to set aside the title-deeds, to interpret the terms of the trusts, or to determine that the Church into which they had been received should be merged into another — one. as they might suppose, better suited to their wants. It was for them to decide, according to their consciences, what Church would best provide for their spiritual needs. It was not for them to decide that, because they thought another Church than the one into which they had l)een admitted to the privilege of member- ship, was better, they would transfer the property of their fellow-worshippers, to whom it belonged, to the Church which they themselves wished to join. The question must be decided by the judgment delivered in the Thurso case : "A resolution to form a union with a separate body is not an act of management properly falling to be regulated by the voice of the majority of the congregation. It is one affecting and altering the use, possession and destination of the property of the body." It might as reasonably be set up, that the inmates of a model lodging-house, in which rules were established giving to a majority the power of framing regulations for their good government, should, on the ground that majorities rule, vote to themselves the fee simple, and set aside the titles of the real proprietors. On the 15th of June, 1875, ^^^ ^Qy. John Cook, D. D., was elected Moderator of the new body, in recognition of his services in breaking up the Church to which he had professed to belong, and in obtaining Acts of Confiscation against the members of that Church who refused to follow his lead. On the 8th of July, 1851, the same Rev. John Cook, D. D , was appointed by the Synod of our Church, along with the Moderator and Clerk, to prepare a pastoral, in terms of resolutions which he took a prominent part in framing. The words of one of these resolutions are so apposite, that they may be quoted with advantage, as applying to the present position of affairs : " We cannot forget that our higher function, as a Church of Christ, has reference to the religious and spiritual well-being of our people, and that it is our duty to employ every righteous means to frustrate any attempt that may be made to take away from us a guaranteed provision which enables us to accomplish more effectually the ends of our voca- tion. "We shall, therefore, continue to protest against any attempt to subvert the exist- ing law, not only on account of the detriment which would ensue to the interests of religion, but also because it is incumbent on us to resist the encroachments of a flagitious principle, which would leave nothing secure in the social fabric, and which, were it to prevail, would inflict serious injury on the general well-being, not so much, perhaps, of the present generation, as on that which shall follow. " The resolutions, of which this forms a part, were drawn up when the interests of our Church were attacked by open enemies. They are no less true now, when the " encroachments of a flagitious principle" have been attempted by professed friends. So clearly and eloquently do the words I have cited show the danger to the security of the social fabric arising from the disregard of the most solemn contracts, that anything I could add would only weaken their force. The attempt to alienate the property of the Church, designed for carrying on her special work, is certainly not less flagitious than the agitation against the Clergy Reserves, for the latter was open and straightforward, differing widely from the pretences set up by those who under high-sounding professions have been guilty of conduct that does not increase the respect of the world for religion. 43 These encroachments we shall resist, and shall resist successfully. Confident in the justice of our cause, we can face undismayed the influences that are ranged apainst us- we can afford to wait patiently, and to l)ear without murmuring the trials to which we have been so long exposed. Can those who seek to destroy our Church bear with cdual self- respect the stigma of delaying the hearing of the cases by the most contemptible tech- nical quibbles? "We cannot forget that our higher function, as a Church of Christ ^^ has reference to the religious and spiritual well-ijeing of our people, and that it is our ^^duty to employ every righteous means to frustrate any attempt that may l)e made to ^^ take away from us a guaranteed provision which enables us to accomplish more eflfec- tuallythe ends of our vocation." God helping us, that (hity we shall faithfullv discharge. ^