souri. One of our ministers, well known to many of us as a laborious and faithful preacher of the gospel, applied to the Board of Missions to furnish him pecuniary aid in the work of saving souls. In due time he received a reply from the Secretary of the Board in the following words:

DEAR SIR: The General Assembly have enjoined the Board to commission no one except of loyal submission to the Government, and to the deliverances of the Church on the subject of slavery. We are informed your record is not fair, and we decline sending you a commission. Yours, truly, THOS. L. JANEWAY, Cor. Secretary, &c.

I have seen, sir, a copy of the answer to this astounding communication, which the worthy brother of whom I have spoken forwarded to the Secretary, and in that auswer he solemnly declares that he is and always has been a loyal man. He preached constantly during the war in a part of the State where suspicion was almost certain death, and though officers and soldiers frequently attended his ministry, he suffered no disturbance at their hands. And yet this consistent man of God was cruelly denied the assistance he so much needed, and was driven to hard manual labor to obtain a support for his wife and little ones.

Another brother, whose loyalty I have never heard questioned, made application to the Board for aid, and received the unanimous indorsement of his Presbytery-a Presbytery, too, enrolling among its members some who are loyal to the highest possible degree, and according to the highest possible standard-but after awhile the decree came forth from the Secretary's office in Philadelphia:

"Mr. Forman will hardly come up to the re quisitions of the last General Assembly. His is quasi loyalty, and he is hardly in accord with the Presbyterian Church in its declaims on freedom. It may be hard for him, but he reaps as he sowed. Such men have weli nigh ruined the Chuch; and it is hardly expected that loyal men will contribute to support one in affiliation with rebellion. Yours, truly.

T. L. JANEWAY.” What, Mr. Moderator, was to be done under these circumstances? We were either to place ourselves in an attitude of resistance to the injunctions of the Assembly, or to see brethren whom we knew and loved crushed by the operations of an order that seemed to us most cruel and unrighteous. I leave it to every generous heart to determine what was the path of honor and the path of duty. The Declaration and Testimony party disobeyed, and hence we are here to answer for our sin; but here on grounds that justify our emphatic protest in the sight of God and angels and men.

I need not occupy your time in a discussion of the second inquiry concerning our right to protest, for every Presbyterian in the world recognizes the right, and enjoys this right when he sees fit to employ it in the expression of his views, or in the protection of his sacred privileges. Perhaps there has scarcely ever been an Assembly without a protest being entered on its records, and every year the proceedings of this venerable body pass in review before the Synods and Presbyteries to call forth an expression of their views, and to receive their intelligent sanction or their respectful dissent. It would be idle, therefore, for me to establish a

proposition which is self-evident to every member of this Assembly.

I pass, then, to a consideration of the last question: Is the protest contained in the Declaration and Testimony, and adopted by the Presbytery of Louisville, presented in a spirit and form justified by the necessities of the case? Mr. Moderator, in answer to this inquiry, it might be sufficient to state that we all listened attentively to the lengthy report of the committee on this villified document. That committee had it long under consideration, and doubtless searched it carefully and anxiously to discover every objectionable expression which it might contain. And what did they find? Nothing, nothing, sir, after their laborious research, that can be fairly construed into disrespect to this venerable Assembly. It may be owing to my ignorance of the "fatal imposture and force of words," or my want of a refined and cultivated literary taste, but I confess I cannot see any reason for all this uproar about the violent language employed in the paperwas before the house. Gentlemen may rave and rage as they denounce its fierce and vituperative style, and invoke the hot thunderbolts of hell to strike us dumb and to strike us dead, but they will come much nearer to something that is tangible when they are kind enough to point out the expressions that are so disrespectful as to justify our expulsion from the Church.

one

It is a remarkable fact that in a debate extending through two weeks not even speaker from the majority has touched the merits of the question before the house, either by attempting to expose the unsoundness of the principles contained in the Declaration and Testimony, or the impropriety of the language in which these principles are embodied. We have had denunciation without measure, but not a word of argument or procf. I submit, sir, that the accusers of the Louisville Presbytery have utterly failed to make out their case, even on the ground of disrespectful terms employed in the paper for which they have been arraigned at your bar.

But there is another way of determining the question which I am now discussing. It is by way of comparison. We will take other protests from other parties, and see whether the Assembly has been in the habit of judging harshly of those who assail their action, or whether the present Assembly is disposed to deal out an even-handed justice to all, without respect of persons, who are involved in the same condemnation. The gentleman from Ohio (Dr. Thomas) tried to draw a distinction between what he was pleased to call the organized rebellion of the Presbytery of Louisville, in formally adopting the Declaration and Testimony, and the individual action of others in various parts of the country who signed that immortal document. But I shall show you that it is a distinction without a difference. I shall show you that numerous judicatories have taken practically the same ground occupied by the Presbytery of Louisville, and heace even for consistency's sake, should receive precise'y the same treatment at your hands.

I will not occupy your time by citing in proof of this assertion the action of a large number of Church sessions in view of the unconstitutional proceedings of the General Assembly, but call your attention first to the action of Transylvania Presbytery, prepared by Rev. W. L. Breckinridge, D. D.

"The Presbytery of Transylvania, having maturely considered the proceedings of the last General Assembly (1865), find in them several acts touching the troubles in the Church, which, in our judgment, exceed the powers of the Assembly, and are unwise and inexpedient if they were otherwise; which we also judge to be impossible of execution where they were intended to be enforced, therefore nugatory as to their design." The Presbytery of Ebenezer, at its last fall session, declare, 1st. We find neither in the Word of God, nor in the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian Church, the least authority to interrogate the minister or the private member on the subject of loyalty to the General Government; and while this Presbytery recognizes the right of every Presbytery to examine ministers asking admission into their body as to soundness in the faith as revealed in the Word of God, yet this Presbytery does most unhesitatingly deny that the questions involved in the matter in hand are a part of the "faith" of the Presbyterian Church, inasmuch as they relate solely to the policy of civil government. We believe that the introduction of such questions into our Church courts is fraught with mischief, as it assumes the decision of civil questions by an ecclesiastical body, and tends to destroy the peace and harmony of the Church as a kingdom not of this world. This Presbytery, therefore, expresses its firm determination not to investigate the civil relations of ministers and private Christians; assured that its jurisdiction as a court of Christ's Church is limited to things spiritual and ecclesiastical.

"2d. That this Presbytery will neither accede to nor enforce any new terms of Christian or ministerial communion on the subject of slavery; ncr will they allow cordial sympathy' with the Assembly's action touching this matter to control the reception or good standing of ministers and members."

The third resolution, after announcing that the Presbytery had ceased its connection with Dr. Janeway's Board in the work of Domestic Missions, declares that the action of the Assembly concerning this subject embraces, in our opinion, an unwarranted assumption of power, as well as a perversion of the objects of the Church, claiming that, in addition to the fact that the qualifications above specified are thoroughly unscriptural, this whole matter of ministerial qualifications belongs solely to the Presbytery."

Is there anything stronger than this in the Declaration and Testimony?

The Presbytery of Sangamon (Ill.), a loyal Presbytery in a loyal State, unanimously adopted the following resolutions with regard to the Assembly's acts of 1865:

Resolved, That we, as a Presbytery, in the examination of persons seeking admission to our body, will adhere strictly to the form specified in our standards, believing that there is nothing in the existing state of affairs to justify us in departing therefrom, and that we recommend the pastors and sessions of the churches under our care, to stand in the ways, and see and ask for the old paths where is the good way, and walk therein.

upon a Presbyterial recommendation. We cannot tamely submit to have this or any other Board thus set up as lords over God's heritage.

3. That if the Board of Domestic Missions should presume to exercise the power thus unwisely granted, we will feel ourselves called upon to withhold our contributions from said Board, and to seek some other avenue of contributing to this most worthy cause.

This, Moderator, seems to me to be right decided language for a loyal Presbytery, and places it in the same condemnation with the Louisville Presbytery.

So, too, we find the Presbytery of Lewes, (Md.,) which met May 3, 1865, declaring "that we sincerely deplore the action of the General Assemblies of our Church during the past five years upon the political questions which have convulsed the country with strife and war; that in our judgment such action was not authorized by the constitution of our Church, &c."

The

If time permitted, I would read in your hearing the resolutions adopted by several other Presbyteries, and by the Synods of New Jersey, Missouri and Kentucky. The first of these dissents unanimously from the action of the Assembly mainly on constitutional grounds, and because it will necessarily aggravate and perpetuate, instead of healing the breaches be tween the Northern and Southern Church. Synod of Missouri adopted by a vote of three to one a paper which condemns the action of 1885 in terms as emphatic and explicit as those found in the Declaration and Testimony; and the Synod of Kentucky last fall passed a series of resolutions, the first of which, on a motion to adopt the whole, received the vote of Rev. R. J. Breckinridge, D. D., on a call of the ayes and noes. I will give the resolution that the Assembly may perceive the amazing inconsistency for those who have dragged the Louisville Presbytery to your bar : The acts of the last General Assembly on overtures Nos. 6 and 7, and resolution 4, on the report of the Board of Domestic Missions, in the judgment of this Synod are unwise, as tending to destroy the peace and harmony of the Church, and in some of their provisions unconstitutional and unscriptural; and we indulge the hope and belief that the General Assembly in calmer times will review and correct these Deliverances. And yet, Mr. Moderator, these same gentlemen have hurried the Louisville Presbytery before you, and demand their instant expulsion from the Church for saying precisely what they have said, to-wit: That the action of the Assembly was unwise, unconstitutional and unscriptural, and hence of no binding force. Consisteney is indeed a jewel, but I cannot find it in the prosecution or in the majority of this house, if either of the papers before us is finally passed.

"Resolved, That this Presbytery cannot hold fellowship with any Presbytery, Synod or other ecclesiastical body while it tolerates under its jurisdiction either the sin of slaveholding or the justification of the sin of slaveholding; and especially the justification of it by appeal to the Scriptures, which, in the judgment of this Presbytery, is blasphemy of Almighty God, and a shocking prostitution of His word."

I have never heard that the General Assembly, and particularly the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Thomas) summoned the red-not thunderbolts of hell to smite the Presbytery of Chillicothe for pronouncing the action of our venerable Court blasphemy of Almighty God, and a shocking prostitution of His word; but then we must remember that circumstances alter cases, and it is the Presbytery of Louisville arraigned here for the use of terms which all must admit are far less reprehensible than those employed and never retracted, according to the best of my knowledge and belief, by the Presbytery of Chillicothe.

But, I find still stronger language, if this were possible, in regard to the action of 1845, and 1 comment it to the attention of the Assembly. It is extracted from the leading article of the Christian Monthly Magazine, Vol. I., No. 6, Sept. 1845, and edited by one Thomas E. Thomas, who at that time resided in Hamilton, Ohio. If he did not write it, he at least gave it his hearty approval, and I trust the brethren who are so sensitive about the dignity of the Assembly will listen to it: "That homely maxim-he that steals will lie--is sound Bible theology. The amount of it is, that the man who willfully violates one of God's commands will not hesitate to defend himself by the violation of some other command; and frequently he will do it un disturbed by the consciousness that he is add ing sin to sin. A richer document, in both proof and illustration of this, we have rarely seen than the report on the subject of slavery adopted by the last General Assembly. It clearly proves the declaration of the advocates of universal liberty many years ago, that the united wisdom of the highest judiciary of the Presbyterian Church cannot defend slaveholding or any gross violation of God's law without uttering nonsense, or falsehood, or heresy, or blasphemy. Is it true that the highest court of the Presbyterian Church stands on the concession that slaveholders are not to be disciplined? Our object in this inquiry is not to convict the last Assembly of a breach of the ninth commandment. But we do wish to expose a slan

der, * * and to call particular attention to

the falsehood, absurdity and moral filth, always and necessarily embodied in an apology for the sin of slavery, even when it is carefully prepared by a body composed of chosen delegates from every section of a large denomination." "A little stealing makes a Presbyterian a thief --but stealing largely makes him a saint.”

There, sir, to borrow the gentleman's own chaste and classical language, let him stick this feather in the tail of his judgment and appear again on the platform to the gaze of his admiring friends. This man could call the Assembly of 1845 a thief and a liar, could charge it with uttering nonsense, falsehood, heresy and blasphemy, could pronounce its action full of absurdity and moral filth, and as his reward is exalted to be the recognized champion and leader of the Assembly of 1865, while the Deolaration and Testimony party, for trying by a firm

but temperate course to bring back the Church to her forsaken and dishonored standards, are to be driven from the visible fold of Christ. Admitting that our protest contains expressions offensive to the Assembly, they cannot be worse than the epithets just quoted, and why this great distinction between the offenders?

"Strange all this difference should be 'Twixt tweedledum and tweedledee " But perhaps the difference may be accounted for by a principle embodied in another familiar compact which leads certain men to

Compound for sins they are inclined to,

By damning those they have no mind to." So it may be in this instance, and the Presbytery of Louisville will probably be stricken down for doing precisely what others have been permitted to do with impunity. Nay, to put the case in a still clearer light, they will be sacrificed for openly saying what others over the entire land are secretly saying-for boldly taking the position which others are everywhere clandestinely assuming. Our brother from Philadelpha (Dr. Boardman) pointedly declared this afternoon, that he did not believe there were five men in the Assembly who would refuse to indorse the principles set forth in the Declaration and Testimony, and is the Presbytery of Louisville to be dissolved for expressing these principles in language that may seem to some a little to strong? If this is to be, sir, then I am free to say that all who signed the protest which they adopted are bound by the tender claims of friendship, by the high demands of honor, and by the sacred obligations of duty, to fall with them.

If this is the fixed purpose of the "solid majority of four to one" in the Assembly, then, in my judgment, the adoption of the paper presented by the committee will be the wisest course that can be pursued. This will end the conflict at once; but mark my prediction, the acceptance of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Dr. Humphrey) or of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Washington City (Dr. Gurley) will not bring peace to the agitated bosom of the Church.

this

And yet, Mr. Moderator, strange as it may appear to the Assembly, peace is what I most earnestly desire. To purchase that peace, although the remark will no doubt call forth another sneer, I would cheerfully offer myself a victim to appease the insulted dignity of the body. I was taught at my mother's knee to venerate the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church next to my God, and it was certainly far from my design or wish to use unbecoming and disrespectful language towards high Court of Jesus Christ. Show us that we are in the wrong, and most gladly and promptly will we retract our Declaration and villify Our Testimony, but depend upon it, injustice and needless severity will not quiet the disturbed elements that threaten the stability of our Ziou. We may fall, but others will take up our cause and carry it forward to victory, if not speedily, then surely at the appearing of our Lord. We bide our time, and standing unmoved in the consciousness of right, are not here to ask for mercy, but to ask that you, too, may do that which is right in view of the account we must all so soon render in the day of judgment.

Brethren, in arriving at your verdict concern

When I read the acts of the Assembly of 1865, for the first time in my life I was obliged to assume an attitude of resistance to the authority of this venerable body. Although dissatisfied with the acts of the four preceding Assemblies, I looked upon them as plague-spots that had appeared only on the walls, and fondly hoped that the dire infection would not reach the deep foundations. But, sir, when the Assembly of Pittsburg had closed its sessions, nothing was left for me to do, except to withdraw from all connection with our ecclesiastical courts, or to gird myself for the conflict. The former course I much preferred, and was on the point of pursuing it when letters began to reach me from various quarters urging cooperation in the attempt to reclaim the Assembly from its wanderings.

This attempt, so far, has signally failed, and nothing has come of it save excitement, wrangling, and in all probability division. We made the effort with downright earnestness, and perhaps with too much rudeness, but we thought that we were justified by the pressing necessity of the case, and hence were not over careful in the choice of the means to accomplish our ends. We might have been more particular in our selection of nice words, but we really felt that there was no time to parley about delicate shades of meaning and courtly phraseology.

Mr. Moderator, while listening, just before the close of the afternoon session, to the earnest and eloquent tones of the brother from Philadelphia, (Dr. Boardman,) my attention was called away by the sudden darkening of the windows. 1 looked up and saw a black volume of smoke roll heavily toward the sky and the next moment heard the sharp, quick cry of fire, and the hurried tramping of feet, and the rattling of the swift engines, as those who are set to guard our city against the destructive element rushed forward to quench the angry flames. They went hastily, and, I suppose, rudely, for they could not be very ceremonious while the fire was darting its red tongue above the roof that sheltered us. Thus, sir, it was with the Declaration and Testimony men. They saw

the beautiful temple in which our fathers worshipped on fire, and with a loud shout they dashed into the midst of the curling flames to save our holy place from utter destruction. Even granting that the danger was not so great as they apprehended, must they be deemed worthy of severe punishment for a mere excess of zeal in a righteous cause? If so, they will receive the stroke not in anger, but in unutterable sadness, having, as their last consolation, the sweet thought that Christ sits enthroned in undisturbed composure above all these tumultuous passions of earth, and will surely vindicate His faithful followers at His coming. What, meantime, is to be the result of all this strife, none can predict. We only know that there is One in heaven who will bring order out of confusion, making the wrath of man to praise Him, and the remainder of wrath restraining by His almighty hand.

A song which once stirred the heart of a nation and changed the destiny of an empire owed its origin to a storm. A poet went forth to gaze upon the face of nature, after a tempest had held high carnival in one of her most lovely retreats, and while musing upon the desolations around him he heard the bewitching melody of a bird ascending in praise to God. The bird sang so gratefully because refreshed by the water which it had just been drinking from the upturned cup of an acorn lying on the ground. And the acorn had been dislodged from its lofty bough by the violence of the storm which, though casting it down, also filled its dissevered cup with the rain. After all, then, the storm gave to the world a mighty and immortal song, and I can only pray that the tempest which is now beating upon our beloved Church may suggest truths to some chosen servant of God which will impart to the anthems of the redeemed who are to come after us a loftier and sweeter rapture.

"Behold, we know not anything,

I can but trust that good shall fall
At last-far off-at last to ali
And every winter change to spring.'

Mr. Moderator, I thank you for the courtesy which you have shown during these discussions, to me and to the little minority which I represent.

Fathers and brethren, I thank you for the patience and the kind attention with which you have listened to one defending a cause so unpopular.

May the blessing of God rest upon this venerable Assembly.

1866.

Philippians, iv, 8.- Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."

FATHERS, BRETHREN AND CHRISTIAN FRIENDS: Though I have been deeply interested in the struggle in which your country has been engaged, and look upon it as specially the great event in our world's history in this century, yet it will not be expected of a stranger who has come to seek for rather than to give information about your national affairs, that he should speak of American questions. I believe that those who have done me the honor and allowed me the privilege of addressing this venerable Assembly will be more gratified if I give an account of some of the conflicts of Great Britain, which, though they have not been like yours, with "garments roiled in blood," will notwithstanding issue in important practical results-possibly reaching beyond my country into yours.

In Great Britain we hear much about the BROAD CHURCH. It is marked by certain features, so that we can distinguish the person who belongs to it, whether he professes to do so or not. It appeared first in one particular branch of the Christian Church, but it has spread over other bodies, showing that there is a pre-disposition in our time to catch its peculiar spirit. It is found in Scotland as well as England. As yet we have not much of it in Ireland, but with the influence exercised by the centralizing London press, and the close intercourse between the three kingdoms, whatever prevails in the larger country will be sure to find its way to the others. In these circumstances, thinking minds in every land would do well to consider the principles, temper and operations of this iufluential, if not numerous, religious party.

In looking to any system recommended to our favorable consideration, we should of course inquire whether there be any evil in it, with the view of avoiding it, but also whether there be any good in it, in order to accept and adopt it.

I certainly would not reckon it an evil in the Broad Church, were it seeking, as its name might seem to imply, to bring the various sections of the Church of Christ to a clearer understanding and to a closer union. One of the most hopeful signs of our day is the breathing on the part of so many praying and loving Christians after a more intimate communion among the different

branches of the one Church. I am convinced, that sooner or later, these earnest desires and fervent prayers will realize the end they contemplate, and be consummated in a happy, if not incorporation, at least co-operation, which will greatly strengthen the cause of pure religion by combining energies which are at present scattered, and exhibiting before the world the visible unity of the Kingdom of Christ. But I am not aware that the Broad Church is specially striving after a union of the evangelical churches in the three kingdoms, on the continent of Europe, in America, or throughout the world. I rather think, that in this respect, it is a Narrow Church, aiming to combine only those who have imbibed its peculiar spirit; rejecting what may seem to the Greeks as "foolishness;" having little or no sympathy with the less refirelishing only what is elegant or academic; ned, though it may be more zealous bodies whose speech "bewrayeth" them as showing that they come from the provincial Galilee, and are not natives of the churchly Judea.

But a heavier charge can be brought against this new system, or rather spirit. Its avowed aim is to blunt the sharpness of some of the doctrines and precepts proclaimed in the Churches of the three kingdoms. But in carrying out its purposes, it has deprived these of their point and edge, so that they are no longer "quick and powerful and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit."

As to the Bible itself, its language is always hesitating, often doubtful. It acknowledges that the Bible is in some sense the word of God, but it does not profess to yield obedience to it as a rule of faith and morals; it would receive only so much as is verified by reason and human sentiment, and if it does not reject, it at least sets aside, or overlooks other doctrines or precepts. It is to be admitted in its behalf, that it allots a high place to certain truths of Scripture. It delights to exhibit the purity, the elevation, and the love of the Divine Being. It acknowledges fully the Deity of Jesus Christ,-though sometimes it seems to found it on doubtful philosophical speculations, rather than on the written word-and it dwells with rapture on the lovelier features of his character. But on the other hand it seeks to lower and to modify the doctrine of the atonement made by Jesus Christ for transgression. Indeed the view which it accepts and presents of sin seems