^ ^\ ^ ^N-^

. D-\G\

SEP :3

kC'w/O

OP THB
OF THB

r CANADA PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH,

SINCE THE UNION IN 1861.
BY THE RB3V. AlLiKX. IP. KEMP, M. A., \VINX)80R, C. "VV.

ris now upwards of five years Bince the Free
Church and the United Pre8l)yterian Church
were induced, on terms agreeable to both, to
unite together, and form one organization under
the name of The Canada Preabyterian Church.
This event was hailed with almost universal joy ;
and sanguine expectations were entertained by
its friends as to the beneficial results that would
follow. That the Union in itself was a good
measure, few will deny, and that it was a step in
the right direction, seems obvious. The two
Churches occupied the same field, embraced in
their membership the same class of persons, were
identical in their order, worship, and discipline,
held the same doctrinal standards, and only dif-
fered on certain matters of opinion as to the re-
lation of the Church of Christ to the Governments
of the world. The wonder with many was, not
that a Union had been effected, but that it should
have been so long delayed, and so diflicult to ac-
complish. Both interest and duty seemed to
impel towards Union. Neither of the Churches
were very strong in numbers or in wealth. Both
found their resources inadequate to overtake the
field of mission labour which lay before them.
What therefore could be more natural than that
they should unite their forces into one, for their
^mutual edification and the more vigorous and
' effective prosecution of their Christian work ?
This was accordingly done in Montreal in June
1861, under conditions most auspicious and pro-
mising. The two streams of Church life then be-
came one, and prepared themselves to sweep on
in greater volume than before, through the gener-
ations to come.

It may, at this time, after an experience of so
many years, be both expedient and profitable to
take a friendly review of the position of the
United Church, and to ascertain what has been
^ the effect of the Union, and what the Church's
progress in those departments especially upon
which it| character and position mainly depend ;
viz., its Miniitry, its Membership, and its Finances.
These may be regarded as the barometers which,

by their increase or decrease, gauge with certain-
ty the Church's groAvth or decay, rise or fall, in
this progressive world.

Thanks to our pains taking Statistical Com-
mittees, and to the wisdom of our Synod, thero
have been accumulating from year to year, sta-
tistics sufficiently accurate and complete, to en-
able us to institute a comparison between corres-
ponding periods of the Church's history, be/ore
and after the Union.

From these statistics we have prepared, and
now present to the Church, certain comparative
tables, embracing periods as favorable for com-
parisons as can be selected, and for which the
published statistics are as complete and reliable
as can be expected. These periods are, from
1855 to 1859, before the Union, and from 1862 to
1866, after it. We thus take four years before
and four years after the Union, and compare the
statistics of the two periods together. In the de-
partment of the Ministry the statistics are perfect,
being taken in every case from the Synod's Rolls.
In those, however, of the Membership and Fi-
nances, the data are not quite so reliable ; but yet
as a good deal of pains was taken with the re-
ports of these years, their figures maybe regarded
as a fair approximation to the actual facts.

Having made these explanations, we would now
draw attention to the information which the
statistics of the Free Church and the United
Presbyterian Church, for the years 1855 to 1859,
on the one hand, and the Canada Presbyterian
Church for the years 1862 to 1866, on the other,
afford.

I. Thk Ministby. — 1. From the published re-
cords of the Free Church we find there were —

Ministers on the Boll in 1855, 104

" " " 1859, 143

Increase in four years, 39

Average increase per annum, 9.75

or 9.40 per cent.

2. From th<f piiMiHii'ed records of tliu U. P.
Chiirth w»r find thi-rc wi-re —

MiiiistvrH on thu lloll in JRr.n, r>0

" " « 1H51», (itj

Increase in four years, 1 (>

Average increase per aniiuni, 4

or 8 per cent.

Th(! averajre iinniial increastr for the two
ChurclicK will thus be 8.87 per cent.

3. In the Canada Presbyteriuu Church, on the
other hand, tliere were —

Ministers on the Roil in ] 802, 2.11

'« " " 18(J(J, 248

Increase in four years, 17

Averapie incnase per annum, 4.25

or, 1 .85 per cent.

In these tnhles we have the nofcible fact liroii^'lit
out, that, while the 104 ministers of the Free
Church increased liy 39, and the 50 of tlic U. P.
Church, l>y 1(5, between the years 1855 and 1850,
the Canada Presbyterian Church, with its 231
Ministers, increased by only 17, between the
years 18(32 and 18GG. Or, again, that wljile the
two Churches, hrfore the Union, increased at tin-
average rate of 8.87 per cent, per annum, the C.
P. Church, after the Union, increased by cnly
1.85; being a difference of 7 i)er cent, in favor
of the former, or of 8.55 in favor of the Free
Ohurch. We thus see that had the C. P.
Church, after the Union, increased at the same
rate as the two Churches out t)f which it was
formed did before the Union, we should have had
80 additional Ministers instead of only 1 7 added
to our numbers.

Allowance must however be made for tlu;
deaths that have occurred in the C. P. Cliurch
during the past four years. Of these there wjis
the unusual number of 15 in all ; whereas in thi;
period previous to the Union there were only 5
in both churches. This gives a diff"erence of 1 0,
or an average of 2 per annum, or 90 per cent, to
be reckoned to the C. P. Church ; whicli if ad-
ded to the actual per-centage of increase makes,
it 2.75 per cent. ; still leaving a diflFerence of
6.12 percent, in favor of the Church before the
Union.

As regards demissions, we find that while in
tho four years from 185(j to 1850 they amounted
to 44, or 1 1 per annum, in the four years from
1861 to 1866 they only amounted to 32 or 8 ])er
annum. These figures are found in the publish-
ed reports of Presbyteries.

Again in the matter of receptions and licen-
sures there were 21 of the former and 28 of the
latter in the two churches before the Union,
against 12 and 36 in the C. P. Church after the
Union. Taking the two together, it would ap-
pear that the additions to the ministry were
about the same in both periods, being 49 in the
one and 48 in the other.

Of ordinations, tranHhitionn, And InrtflrfJonH,

<-la.ssed unth-r the general name of settlement,
there were inidl in the tv o ehiinlies before the i
Union lie, and in the ('. 1'. Chiirdi after the
Union only OH, notwithstanding its greater pro-
portion of strength, and its, at least, equal
facilities.

'riiese ligures give collateral confirmation of
the eoiK-lusioiis drawn from the t^ibles of stiitis.
ti<'S, and show that in the main they are a pretty
fair represented ion of the condition of the Church.

II. — TiiK SIkmbeusuip. — 1. In the Free Church
there were —

Members reported in 1855, 1 1,101 1

" " " 1850, 1(^.,485

Increase in four years, 5,204

•

Average .'inniial increase, 1,32!*

or 12 percent.

2. In the U. P. Church there were—
M<ndiers reported in 1855, 6,288

" " " 1850, 9,203

Increase in four years, 3,005

Average annual in<i'ease, 754

or 12 i>er cent.

3. In the C. P. (inircli there were—
Members reported in 1 H(>2, 30,256

" " " 18(;(;, 36,460

Increase in four years, 6,213

Average r.nnual increase, 1,553

or 5 pi^r cent.

On comj)aring these tables it woidd ajipear that
the 10,000 of th(! Free ('hureh increased nearly as
much in four years as the; 30,000 of.the C. P.
Church ; ami that while the /wo ('hurchcs, before
the I'nion, increased each on an average at the
rate of 1 2 i)er ci-nt. jjcr annum, th(^ ow. Church,
after th'.> Union, increased only at the annual rate
of 5 per cent., being a difference of 7 per cent, in
favor of the former. We also find that had the
C. P. Church, after the Union, increased at the
same rate as the two Churches of which it was
compo.sed did separately before the Union, we
should have had an addition to our memberships
of 14,520 during the jtast four years, instead of
only 6,213.

III. — The Fi.vancks. — In this department we
shall confine attention to the stipend account, as
being the largest and most complete item of the
statistical returns, and at tlie same time the best
test of the Church's outward prosperity.

1. In the Free Church we find that the —
Stipend acct. amounted in 1855, to $45,878
" « « " 1859, to 64,857 ^

Increase in four years, 18,979

Average annual increase, 4,745

or 10.20 per cent.

2. In tlu! II. V. (;imr« h wr fiixl tliut the —

Stip<'inl(uc'tnnioiititf<l in \»r,r,, to S20,rir.:i

" " «« " i85'j, to :u,2ir»

IncroaHc in four yonm, 10, cc;

Ave
or

rii};i' anniml incrcfisc, 2, '505

or of I'.l |HT cent.
Tho av» rafjr anniml inrroaKo for tlio two
Clnirclu-H. for tlic four yciirs hctwoen 185r» and
1850, will thus l»' ll.OO per cent.

3. In till' C. P. Chiinh we find tliat tlic —

Stipciul arct. amounted in IKC'J, to $10l,ri;)9

«« «< «' " IHiJC, to 12;»,711

IntTfaHc in four j'l

28,112

Avorafjr- annual incnasc, 7,028

or about 7 jxt cmt.

On comparing' tlnsi; taMrs we find, tliat whilf
in tiu! four years hetween IHit') and 185'J, tlie rate;
of increase in the Free Chun li was 10.20 per
cent. p»T annum, and of the I'. I'. Chureli 13 jxr
cent., in the C. 1*. (.'huruli it was only 7 percent,
for th(^ peri(»d i>etwe<'n lKt;2 ami 18(JG ; heinp a
ditferencH? of :{.2() in favor of tiu; Free Cliunh,
and of (j in favor of th(! U. P. Chunh before tlu^
I'nion ; or taking the avera^'t^ increase of the two
Churches at 1 1 .00 per cent., tlu; «litference in
their favor will amount to l.OO \tvr cent, per
annum. If, furtlu-r, th(i rate of increase had been
the sauK! after the lliiion, as it was before it, we
should havt- ha<l an increa.se in our income at this
date of S47,0OO instead of only $28,000.

In looking over these tables, we cannot but
note the remarkablt! similarity in the rates of
increase in the two Churches respectively, before
the Uni<m. In the membership the rat«! is ex-
actly th(^ same. In the Ministry there Ls a dif-
ferenc«i of 1.40 per cent, per annum in favor of
the Free Church ; and in Finances of 3 percent.
in favor of the U. P. Church. From this item,
however, is to bo deducted supplementary aid to
Congregations from the Mother Church in Scot-
land up to the year 18.")7, and apparently in-
cluded in the returns of stipend, amounting,
probably, to at least §500 \wy annum. On the
whole the two tables are renuirkably alike, and
indicate an almost equal rate of progress.

These are certsiinly not the results that before
the Union the sanguine friends of that measure
anticipated from their labors. On the; contrary
it was supposed that the Union of the Churihes
would largely conduce to the increase of the
United Church's lif(! and progress. Here, how-
ever, is a decided re-action, — a manifest loss of
power — and that, too, not by stages, but at one
leap. The year 1861 — the year of the Union —
marks the period of the Church's arrested growth.
That for a year or two before and after the Un-
ion, there should be a measure of inactivity in
the work of Church extension, might reasonably
be expected and allowed, but that this inactiv-
ity should continue from year to year, with no
apparent hope of improvement, is not a very
agreeable fact to contemplate.

It may therefore well Ik; asked, Why it is that
our rati; of progress since the Union, has n«)t
kept pac(( with our rat*^ before it? Why this
sudden and marked arrest in tlu! increase of our
Ministry, our Membership, and our lie venue Y

There has not been to any great extent an
amalgamation of congregations to account for
this decay. Of this there havt^ only oc( urred a
few instances over tlu; whole Church. We have
oidy heard of fotir, and if there be more, they
cannot at the utmn.st appreciably aflect the re-
sults which the statistics yield.

Again as to the condition of the country
during the periods compared. There dctes not
a|)p< ar to be any material ditlerence. If any-
thing, th(^ periotl between 18(!2 ami 18GG is tho
more jirosperous of the two. This we would in-
fer from th<! fact: First, that the sum of $4,
000 of arrears and additions has been paid on
account of stipend, over and above what wag
l)romised. Second, that on looking over tho
public stiitistics of immigratiim wt; find, that
whileiu till! four years from 1855 to 1859, tho
accessions U) our popuhition from Scotland, tho
home of Presbyterianism, were 8,229 ; that, in tho
four years from 18GI to 18G5 amoTinted to 12,
453, — being a difterence of 4,224, or an average
of upwards of 1,000 per annum. To this wo
might also safely a<ld an additional 100 per an-
num for Presbyterians from tin? north of Ireland.
These figures make our diminished increase,
since the Union, all the mort; striking, and con-
strain us to look within the Church itself for tho
causes of its decay.

If it be hen; asked; Has the Union itself had
anything to do with this arrest on our progress?
What shall wc; answer?

Here we touch on tender ground ; and yet in
truth we cannot overlook the question. As a
friend and advocate of ti.a Union, we may be
permitted to discuss it without being charged
with prejudice or hostility. What, after all, if
our Union, for which we so ardently labored
nud prayed, should, like the meeting of the op-
posing waves of the ocean, have counteracted
each the enthusiasm of the other, and produced
an inauspicious repose ? Can this have been
tile case ? That each Church before the Union
had its own fine enthusiasm — and that each
labored with a generous emulation tD overtake
the mission work of the country, is manifest.
Each was animated with a special etprit du corps,
and was zealous for the maintenance of that
principle of the Divine Word of which it was a
special representative. Each had a history
which it regarded as honorable, and cherished
with devotion. It had a life springing out of its
own jmst, which it loved. Such minor motives,
as well as the major one of preaching the gospel
to every creature under heaven, animated each
Clnirch in prosecuting its misson in this coun-
try, and may to a large extent account for its
special progress.

That the Union has made an alteration in
these respects cannot be doubted. Each Church
has been in some measure detached from its
old moorings — from its own past. While priu-

ciplo may not have been compromiKod in the
Uni(»n, it miiy ytt be fciircd that our special
fooliiij^H iukI cnthuHiasm have lieen arrewtod and
8uhdued. Wu may tliink tliat we tarry with uh,
into the United ("hiireJi, all that we had ami
were in our separat*- Htate, hut we do not. Our
Bci)arate enthusiasms wi-re diverse ; the one can-
not fully sympathize with thti other, and must he
nhated to the level of the other; each to each,
in all our puldie procedun-. We may, it is true,
in our i»rivate and social meeting's, keep our old
fires bjirning, or fan them into a fitful Maze ;
but when we come to act with each other, the
feelings must be toned down into a common
chord. As yet our United Church has no history
no contendingH, no martyrs, no heroes, no spe-
cial principhs to represent. It is new-born, and
has no past. Its fortune lias yet to be iarv«'d
out of the unshaiied future; ita special enthusi-
asm lias yet to be created.

The results of our Union, so far, may be teach-
ing us, by expedcnce, that Union is not always
strength, and that the half Bometimes exceeds
the whole. The conclusion may be forcing it-
self on us, that the Unitttd powers of two moral
forces are not always equal to the sum of l»oth
in separation ; and that the true way of uniting
the Church of Christ in its several nominalities,
is not by at once incorporating, but by gradually
harmonising its several parts. We are sure that
a perfectiid harmony will result in a unity ; Ijut it
will not always liai>i)en that a unity will be har-
monious, or will impart to the United whole a
more vigorous life.

While we so write, would we advocate a re-
version to the past ? No ! AVe cannot go back.
The deed is done ; we must make the best of it.
It may come out all right in the end. The pre-
sent generation, with its special feelings, sym-
pathies, and affections, wil! pass away, and a
new race of men will arise, to whom our history
and our work will become ^ curious antiquity,
and who knowing only the Church of the Union,
will love it as we have loved the churches of our
fathers, and will, on the solid foundations which
we have laid, build up a gmnder Temple to the
Lord than ever we could have done each by it-
self alone, or ever can do united into one.

There may, however, be other causes at work
to which may in jiart be attributed our decay.
It may be that in our new ecclesiastical arrange-
ments errors have been committed, that have
worked di-sastrously f r our interests. Tliat this
has been the case we have no doubt. If we lot k
to the new organization of our Presbyteries and
to our Home Mission and Collegiate operations,
we shall find there enough of folly to account
tor much of the stagnation which we now have
to deplore in the Church.

To see the bearing of these things on the
Church, it will be necessary to survey the i)lans
pursued, in carrying on the Mission work of the
Church, before and after the Union, in the re-
spective bodies.

In the Free Church, before the Union, the
Home Mission was carried on almost exclusively
l>y the Presbyteries, within their own bounds,

without the intervention of extrantxUR or over-
seeing Committees. All that the Synod's C<mi-
niittee had then to do, was to allocate the ^
I'reachers and Missionaries to the several I'resby-
teries as they were required. The Presbyteries,
in fact, ehosti their own su|)plii'S twice a year,
and were respoiisiltle for their employ nieiit and
payment. The Presbyteries were thus able to
ada|)t their supplies to the special wants of the
vacant charges an<l Mission Stiitions under their
care. Fixed charges were in this way soon sup-
plied with pastors, antl stations were nourished
into Churches, ({enerally the Missionaries re-
mained in one i)la e from three to six months, '^
and private arrangements always gave probation-
ers an opportunity of being heanl in vacant con-
gregations. This plan was not a device of any
one's wisdom, but grew spontjineously out of
tlu! position and necessities of tin; (Jhurch and
country. No doubt there were certain juTsons
of a mechanical turn of mind, who would fain
have introduced quiettT and mort; orderly de-
vices, but these were always opposed. Presby-
teries resisted an/ attt-mpt at the invasion of
their just liberties, and were able without moles-
tation to carry on their mission work Avith en-
ergy and success. Under this system the Church
ih)urished, and in its ministry, its members, and
its income, it increa.sed as the statistics show, at
a most gratifying rate.

At the Union this system was almost entirely
broken up, i)artly by the way in which the Pres-
byteries were re-anaiigcd, and partly by the im-
position on the (Jhurch of a centralized system
of Home Mission operations.

Before the Union the Free Church Presby- '
jteries were for the most part large, and em-
braced within them extensive fields of mission
labor. At the Union they were re-arranged on
no conceivable i)rincipU', but that of the local
proximity of congregations. No regard what-
ever was had to the wants of the Hcmie Missions.
The Committee entrusted with this matter, and
the Synod to whom they reported, seemed alike
to act with a reckless inconsidenition of conse-
quences, in theirdetermination to multiply Pres-
byteries, and to parcel out the land into frag-
ments. The opinions and feelings of existing
Presbyteries were wantonly voted down. This
mincing system could only in one or two in-
stances be arrested. Presbyteries had, nolen*
volens, to suffer the amputjition of important
limbs of their territory, even in the face of ur-
gent remonstrance. The Synod was imjiatient
and the Committee pertinacious, and so the dead-
ly work was done.

In both East and West the same policy was
pursued. The tiourishing Missionary Presby-
teries of Montreal, Hamilton, Toronto and Lon-
don, were cut up into pieces, in such a way as
that the wealthy and strong parts had little or
no Mission field, and the weak and feeble" had
the whole outlying work to themselves. What
else but paralysis could be expected from such
an arrangement of the Church's forces ? The
weak were put forward to do all the fighting, and
the strong were entrenched for in the rcai*.

The U. P. Bcrtinn oi the Church did not foci
the cliiiii^:!' so JiiiK h iiH th«! othtrrt, uinl to do
ihciH «irdit, did not prolmlily m-c tlie ftlVctH thiit
wire likely t<» follow its adoption. Thtir own
pPHliytcrits wiTf iilwiiyH siniill, und liiul Ixioinc
acciistonicd toil cfiitnil Mission sclume and ti
contrtd fund. This Coiuinitti-t? of thcirH woh
originally instituted in the yciir 1847, for tlic
])ur|iosc of upplyiiii; the imninil };rant in lud of
weak conjfrfnutions sent from the mother (.'hunli
in Seotlund ; and in IHt'.nt was more fully or-
ganized, and its powers e.\t»n<le<l. It then took
fhar^'o of the annual jrrant from the U. V. Synod
jn Scotland, and the collections of the (.'hurch in
Canada. Its special ohject was to ctfcct "the
gra<liial extinttion of f<»rei;rn aid, hy increasing
tlie .Mission iiwome and resoun s of the Church
in tlie I'rovince." It wn« invisted witli cert.iin
limiti'd powers for tliis end, hut was also en-
joined to pay strict refrarcl to the rights of
rresltyteries. ami to he extremely careful not t«)
interfere with their perfect liherty of action.
The olijects the Committee contemplated were
successfully ac comjilished. Sutticient funds were
collected to rephice the grants withdrawn by the
Church at home. The Church so prospered un-
der the aggressive energi<s <»f Presbyteries, un-
fettered by central machinery, of which they ap-
peared ever to be jealous, that ere long it was
fully able to sustain itself. In tlieir cast^ a cen-
tral fund was found to bi' necessary for the dis-

j triliution of the home grant, so long as it was

' givi'U, and to supplying its want wlu-n it was
■withdrawn. Their Presbyt^-ries, besides, were
Bniall, — the largest of them in 1851 not number-
ing more than nine ministers, and in 1857 not
more than thirteen. In their condition a central
fund could not well be avoided, and was the
most feasible way of efiecting the objects con-
templaled by the Synod. But this Committee
neve.'" thought of embracing within its oversight
the wh«)le Mission field of the Church, or of talk-
ing this Avork out of the hands of the Presby-
teries. Limited even as its powers were, it was

^ regarded by one or two Presbyteries with a jeal-
ous eye, and its recniisitions systematically ne-
glected. The Presbyteries were the true efficients
in their Mission work, and the Committee co-
operated with them only in the distribution of
the public funds of the Church.

I ' At tile Union of tlu; two Churches two plans
for carrying on the Home Mission work were
proposed to the Synod. ' One Avas, that three or
four contiguous Pnsbyteries should bo united
into Missionary or District Synods, — take the
whole Mission field within their bounds under
their joint care, — h(dd (me or two united meet-
ings annually, — find make such executive ar-
rangements as might l)e deemed necessary.

It was argued that this plan, rendered neces-
sary by the smallness of the Presbyteries, would

f'seoire local interest and liberality, and an in-
telligent and generous local superintendence ;
that destitute places would be more effectively
supplied ; that diverse operations to meet the
diverse conditions of localities, would thus be
possible ; that our Mission work would thus be-

come thorough and elTective ; and that the UHurp-
atioiis of central CommitteeH would thus be pre-
vent! »1. Also, that further centralixation than
these District Synods <'ontetnplated, would de-
mand for its working a complitated, < iimber-
some, an<I costly machinery, which neither the
Ministry nor the Church at large could bear, and
would give rise to constant misunderstandings,
obstructiims and debatings.

The other |)lan, whi<'h the Syn«»d by a majority
finally adopted, was that of a central Committee
and a central funil ; supplemented by a C(un-
mittee for the circulation of probationers among
the vacant charges. This Committee takes over-
sight of the Mission field ; it is placed over Prcs-
byti'ries ; they are enjoined to co-operate with it,
not it with them ; they are humbly to attend to
all its re(iuisitions, and fill up all its schedules;
to furnish it with elaborate stjitistics, and to he-
come its clerks and correspondents. The Pres-
byteries, under this plan, can neither project,
or carry on any new project of a Missionary
kind, that requires the expenditure of money,
without first conforming to a set of cumbrous
rules, and waiting on the tardy decisions of the
central gentleman at Toronto. This is the Bu-
reaucratic scheme with which the Church has
fettered the action and the liberty of its Presby-
teries.

What is the result ? Machinery, for one thing I
complicated and heavy machinery I A machin-
ery that is exhausting the strength and patience
of the best nun in the Church, withdrawing them
from their proper ministerial work, and making
them writers of letters and collectors of statis-
tics, that harasses and frets congregations and
stations. Another result is, wide-spread dissa-
tisfaction ; vacancies and stations, missionaries,
preachers, and Presbyteries, all alike fretted and
annoyed by its operations. The preachers of
the Church refuse to submit themselves to the
circulating Committee ; the missionaries decline
their appointments ; and Presbyteries are per-
plexed. No wonder than our Mission work is
stagnant. Truly we have retrograded from the
simple to the complex, — the natural to the arti-
ficial, — the fniitful to the barren. Only this, w©
have got machinery !

It may be said that most of the defects of the
system arise from the lack of missionaries and
preachers ; they cannot be obtained in adequate
numbers to meet the urgent wants of the Church.
Granting that this is a difl^ulty, yet it is no new
one. It was felt as much before the Union as it
has been since. The evil is of long standing,
and does not affect the Church now for the first
time. As great an evil as the short supply, is
the method in which that supply is, under the
present system, meted out and regulated. The
Committee on circulation have an average num-
ber of demands, and an average list of supplies
before them. Ignorant of the special character
or wants of either, their work is simply to pro-
portion, in an arithmetic way, the one to the
other, without respect to persons or things. One
is sent to this Presbytery, and another to that ;
now here and now there, for so many weeks, iu

mnnd HUcccHHion, until thr whoh; vmitiit Arid | mcnninfr uh in our own i-vcn, iuiiI liindcrin^c our

<»f tln' Ciiiircli in plcuHtujtly Mptittt'd over witli

wcfklv, or fnitiii^^litly. pnui liiii^;. 'I'Ih- riHiilt is,

tliiit no Koliil \vi>il\ is <l()iji', iuhI iiltic |iru;;r('Ks is

ina<i«'. ( '(>ii;;r('^tLtiiiiiH ui'c <lr('|ily ^lirvnl witli

the 8yHt< III ; |iust<>ral IiiImii- is uliiitist toliilly iir-

xlt-i'Uui ; till' wcury anil tin- iliscoiira^^cil air not

chiTiHbc'i or i lncrcil. What else, under sin h a

]»r<K'C'KK, coiilil 1>«' rx|«<t»'il, than that our in- j

crcoMi- Kiioiild h«' Hudih Illy arrcHtod.

Why (uiiiiot WL- K't "A laJ'W>' snpplyHIian wc

have at pnsi lit, of picachrrs and luissionarics ?

— What is it that hindirs? In tin- tirst plaic,

I'rt'Hhyti rirs, iindrr the jircsi-nt systciii of tiiin;;s, that for the Cliunirs sake it (aniint he too plain-
ly said, that the i'riiniptil has lost the t'ontidciim
of the Chun h, and is seriously injuriiiK itH Col-
lej^e, and retaidiii;^ its pro;^reKS.

work. Impelled by a hciimi' of duty wr do now,
as the on!y likely way of naehinw the evil, wiy
that the Kevereiid I'liiieijial of our Collep', hy
reason of his jiei iiliar < haraeter and disposition,
and the loose, i.reKular, and ihfei tive method of
his teaehiiiu:, is Mie luuie of our ( 'olle^'e. It in
reported, t<H>, that from year to year it is ),'ettin>f
worsi' ; and ho serious has the matter hecoine,
that a lar^i! nr".i)HT of the most intelligent «if
our students huve, rhiejly for this reason, ^ono
to rrincetoii, II. S. So f,'reat is the damap- that
the state of the ('olle;,'e is doinu' to the Chiireh,

)iave little or no interest in lookiii;,' out for ad-
ditional preaclieiH and students. They know
very little of tin; aetual wants of tiie I'liiireh.
Tht; nii.sMion work is taken out of tiuir hands,
ftUil relepite<l to ( 'oiiimitteeH. That this has a
t«'ndeiuv to cool their zeal for tin- exteiisiiui of

Notwithstanding' this loiidition of tliin^^s, and
the manifest short sup|il)' of pnachers, we havo
to ((im|ilain that the S)nod has yet shown ojipo-

liie (/'hurch and the imrease of its ministry, who sitioii to the institution of u new (,'o|lej<e in tho

♦•an douht? Their respoiisiliility in this matter
is lesBoned hy thy intervention of a Committee,
And hy the suhordiniito co-operative position in
which they are jiluco*!.

A Kt'cond cause of the short supply of i)n'ach-
icrs, is the present condition of our Collef,'iate In

Kiistern jtart of the I'rovinci', wher») it is earnest-
ly desired, and greatly m eded. In many res-
peets tht; Kast is widely dilfereiit from tin; West,
and requires, for the ('hureh's inaintinanet; and
extension, sjieeial operations and means. ItH
IVotestiint po|iulation is widely scattered, and

Rtitution. This (jolle^xe, which was the hope of I thinly sown anion;,' Kreiu hand Catholic piople.
the Church at ont; time, and for which a sum of i Toronto is far distant from many parts of it, and
iit least $42,000 has heeii spent on the huildin^'s can only he reached i>y a lon^j and expensive
Alone, has lieen for years jrnidually waning; in journey. Very soon it will Ix- politically, as well
public esteem. It is ci-rtainly not without honor ! as p-o^^'iajihically distinct from tho West. Its
in its past career. Ainonj^ its i'rofes.sors we can \ people; an; less Anuricani/.cd than an; those of
note such ripe and accomplished scholars and \ Upper (,'anada. It has its own Schools of h-arn-
<^hristian gentlemen as Kiiij;, Esson, Uintoul, and iiif,', anil its own Universities, and a national
Young. Their teaching was of a high order, and feeling of its own. There an; no more vigoroiiH
in some instances the very best of its kind. | and libcr.il congregations anywhere to be found
They took a kind and paternal interest in the | than in the Kast. Why, then, should any ob-
£tudents, and gave them a relish for study which stacle lie placed in the way of its obt^iining a
they nevc;r lost. The College has dune good ser- i College of its own ? And why should not every

vice to the Church, besides, in sending out a
large number of zealous and able ministers, some
of whom occupy with honor its most important
pulpits, and who will favorably compare with
the preachers of other countries and oth(;r Col-
leges. All this we mc>st heartily say of the ("ol-
lege. Yet, nevertheless, we must also say, that
within the past few years it has fallen in public

facility be offered by the Church at large for thiK
puri)ose ? Inatliliation with Mcdill University,
a Tlieological Faculty in Montreal would, from
indications already given, go far to double tho
number of our students.

We would, however, touch on another and last
cause that hinders to some extent the increaso
o*our Ministry, and the progress of the Church,

regard. Few of its present race of students have namely, the greatly inadetjuate support provided

any great love for their Alma Mater. Many at-
tend it because it is for them tlu; only access to
the Ministry, and many seek other pastures when
opportunity ol!"ers. Fnnn the lips of few, if any
of its late alumni, di) we hear the language of
commendation or atftction. In the Chinch at

for Ministers. This matter calls for special and
serious attontiim. It may be safely said that at
least three-fuurths of our Ministers have barely
enough to live on, and have besides the mortiti-
cation of receiving what they dcj i^vi.^ at uncer-
tain times and in small amovmts. Many cannot

large, among Ministers, Elders, and jjcople, there | live upon the stipend they receive, and are c«)ni-

18 the same painful feeling of dissatisfaction.
That this should liinder students from entering
on a course of study for the Ministry is manifist.
Why is this? it may be impartially asked. The
Answer is a matter of some delicacy, and yet it
ought to be honestly and fearlessly given. All
our Ministers know it. They speak of it famili-
arly in their private circles, and many of them
are much exercised in mind und conscience about
it. The time has come, we think, when the evil
must bo named. It is fre]tting the Church, bo-

pelled to eke out a living by other mens. The
families of many Ministers are frequently pin-
ched for lack of adequate food and clothing ; and
their libraries are small, and seldom graced with
a new book. The children of Ministers, who
ouglit to be the most forward to embrace tho \
ministry, are thus driven with dislike from the
service of the Church, and the youth of our con-
gregations, seeing the trials of their pastors, gen-
erally shrink from contemplating the office.
That w'c may sec clearly how this matter

HtniitlH, l«t UH turn to the MtutlKtIrH. Tluru we
tiiiit tliiit (III- iiviniK'" «ti|»rmJ of nu li Minister in
|lii! Kitf Cliiircli WHS in Ih:,:,, $441; in IH.'.'.i,
$4r).'J; innciiHr, .'«;i2. In tht; 11. P. Chnrdi it
wiiH, in ih:.:,, $411 ; in l«.'.l», S47M ; in( rmsr, $(11!.
In the CuniulH ricMliytciiun Clinrch it was in
IHr.'i, $4r):»; In l «•!(!, Snj.J; incnnHi', $7<».

Tin- iivrrm,'i-Hti|tiii<l ut tlnsc duttrt would thus
appDir to liiivc li«« n ,l«'l'c>rt' tht- I'nion, $t44 ; af-
ter thi- I'nion, S4KH, hein^ an uvcrii^ju incrtatic
HiniT IHT.'.t of $44.

When, howcvt r, we h>ok at thin incrcnm-a lit-
th- rIoKcly, we tiiid tliat, siimll as it is, it arises
Mot from an iiirnasc d nuasun; of lilierality on
th<' part of iiidividiiid nieinlters of the Ciiureli,
l»ut from an increase in the memluisliip of i\w
Heveral conKre^rations, as th<' following' will show.

Then! WHM in tlie Vu-v Chinch an avera>,'t;
nicmhership toeach Minister in lHr)r»,of li>7 ; in
1H.0!», of lir>; increase, H. In tlie U. 1*. Church
there was an avera;,'e niemliership to each Min-
ister in lHr»'>, of r.T) ; in IH')!!, of 141); increase,
15. In tluM'anada I'res. Church there whh nn
nveni>,'e nicmhership to ea< h Minister in 18G2,of
135; in IHOi;, of 117; iiicnase, 12.

If, in like manner, we avera>;e thes;' numhcrs
hefon; the I'nion, inul after it, we find that up
to IH,-)!! the avera^'c nicmi'ership to each Minis-
ter was 12'2, and up to JHiw; it was 141 ; hcin>,'
nn increase, siiK e the rnion, of 1'.). It would
thus apjiear that the lyadditioiial memherH con-
trihiited the S4 I additional of stipend.

This will he nioreapiiaiiiit liy considerinfj the
items of the following' tahhs : The aveni^re con-
trihiition per annum of (lu h member to the sti-
pend account in the Free Church was, in )H,")ri,
$4.10; in IHot), S:i.'X\. In the U. 1'. Clmrch it
was, in IHSf), S'-^-'M; in IH,")!), ■^'-i-'^r,. Tn the
Canada I'res. Chiirih it was, in 1802, $3. 3G; in
180*;, $3.55.

If now a^rain we average tliese amounts hefijre
ami after the I'nion, we iind that the average
contribution for members up to 1850, was $3.07 ;
and up to 18Gt>, $3.35, a falling otf in the latter
period of 32 cents per member.

This tnhh; shows that tlure has been a dimi-
nution in individual liberality in the Church
eincc the Union, and that the increase in the
averages stipend is solely diu; to tht; increase of
the avt'rage membership to each Minister; yea,
<it is even less than by this nih; it ought to have
been; for 19 membi^rs at $3.35 each, should
Lave yielded $G7.75, whereas the average iu-

crcaMu of Hti|M>nd to each MiiiiMter M'aN orly $44.

There would thus appear to have bei n a de-
crease in individual liberality in the Church
sinet; the year 1855. Though our wealth and
ability have been augmente<l to a large extent,
our gifts for the preaching of the (iosp(| have
yet •hrlined. These things demand our seriouH
atte:ition. We need to be awakened out of a
btharg) into which we have fallen, and lo re-
turn to the zeal of our former life. The burdenH
on the Church in the matter of church building'
are not now so great as they were in ft>rnier
years, an<l nothing seems to hinder an !n( rease
in our individual contributions to the stipend
account, of at h-ast onc.third more than we aru
contriliiiting at present.

From this nview of our condition as at'hurch,
it will, we think, manifestly appear that the
causes of our decay lie within oiirselvcK ; are of
our own (Higiiiating ; ami that conse<juently wc
have the remedies alsr' within <iurselves, and in
our own hands. W'iiat, it may be asked, are the
remedies for these things? We answer :

1. Let us j)ut our Kno.x College in order, and
make it a i)rai.se in the Church.

2. Let us establish a new (.'ollege in the P^ast,
and give it our liearty siijiport.

3. Let us give iijt or greatly modify our cum-
brous centralized system of conducting our Home
Mission work, and of supplying our vacancies.

4. Let us organize three or four District Sy-
nods, and intrust the oversight of the Homo
Mission work to them, within th<'ir respective
bounds; and let the rreachers and Missionaries
be distributed twice a year among them.

5. Let us take siicli steps as may be deemed
wi.se to attract Ministers and Preachers to our
Church, and to stir up our people to greater in-
dividual liberality in the matter of stipend.

G. Let it be felt that the burden of the Home
Mission work should mainly and primarily rest
<m Tresbyteries, and let tliere be no more cutting
up of our coinitry into Presbyterial fragments.

We commend these considerations to the Min-
isters, Elders and Members of the Canada Pres-
byterian Church. They are written in no fac-
tious spirit, nor with any evil intent. Our desire
is to present the truth to the Church that she^
seeing and knowing her actual condition, may-
arrest her declining career, and, putting forth
a new energy, make U[) in the years to come
more than the ground she has lost in the past.