would be perfectly happy and supremely wise. Some shuddered at the crimes which had been committed, but still hoped that out of the ruins of the old world a new and a better might yet be reconstructed. The dreams of Rousseau, the sarcasms of Voltaire, and the coarser diatribes of Paine were greedily read by all classes of the people, and the foundations of religious belief seriously shaken. All were staggered, and waited the issue in suspense. One of the first results was, that Europe was plunged into a bloody war, and Britain unhappily whirled into the vortex.

One of the great defects of the Established Church of Scotland was its want of expansiveness. It could not stretch itself out, so as to meet an increased population. The law provided for only one church in each parish. If a new

church was built, or a new parish endowed, it must be by the free-will offerings of the people. It is difficult to erect a new parish now; it was impossible in the last century. The law made no provision for such a contingency. Yet the population of the country was rapidly increasing. A small village became a large town, and one church could not contain the whole population. A coal-seam began to be worked, and a sooty society instantly sprang up where there was a perfect solitude before. A mill was built, and its machinery was no sooner in motion, with its deafening noise, than the hum of human voices was heard in its neighbourhood. In such cases, the parish church was probably at a distance. It would scarcely do to allow the miner or the spinner to sink into heathenism. Where there was Christian generosity, money was collected; the master gave his gold, the workman gave his silver; and proposals were laid before the presbytery to build a chapel and support a minister.

There were a few cases of a different kind, in which the erection of a chapel of ease was desired. Sometimes there was a reluctance to attend the ministry of an unwelcome presentee, and an equal reluctance to leave the Established Church. It was at first thought that the Relief might be a refuge for all such; but the Assembly had destroyed that notion. It was now thought that chapels of ease might be a remedy; and there were instances of people offering to build a chapel and maintain a minister within the pale of the Establishment, and thus dearly purchase exemption from patronage.

It was generally felt that the erection of chapels should be

allowed, and even encouraged; but there was some difference of opinion as to the circumstances in which they should be allowed and encouraged. Where the parish church was crowded, and the entire population unable to find admission to it, or where there was a population with no church within miles, all were agreed upon the propriety of a chapel; but where the people were anxious for a chapel, not so much because the church was full or far away, as because the minister was unpopular, a difference of opinion existed as to whether a chapel should be permitted. There were some who thought that no chapel should be sanctioned so long as there was an empty seat in the parish church; there were others who thought that, in the case of forced settlements, it was better there should be chapels in connection with the Church than meeting-houses arrayed against it.1

When there were such differences of opinion in regard to the circumstances in which chapels of ease should be sanctioned, it was seen that the court which had the power of granting the license would exercise an important influence upon the question. Should it be the presbytery or the General Assembly? Should every presbytery have the power of giving judgment in all cases within its bounds, subject to the review of the higher courts? or should the hands of the presbyteries be tied, and the General Assembly alone empowered to give a decision in such cases? The expediency of granting constitutions to chapels of ease was brought before the Assembly of 1795, and a committee appointed to consider the matter. In 1796 the committee gave in its report. It recommended that, when an application was made to a presbytery to authorize the erection of a chapel, the presbytery should cite all having interest; inquire into the circumstances upon which the petition was founded; learn the arrangements that were to be made for the erection of the building and the support of the minister; and then report the whole matter to the General Assembly, without pronouncing any judgment till specially instructed by the supreme judicatory.2

The only clause in this report which excited discussion was that which required presbyteries to report to the General Assembly without pronouncing any judgment. This was keenly opposed by the Popular party, headed by Dr Erskine and Sir Henry Moncreiff. They argued that the clause was 1 Cook's Life of Dr Hill. 2 Cook's Life of Dr Hill.

Hetherington's History.
Scots Magazine, vol. Íviii.

an infringement of the constitution of the Church. It robbed the presbytery, the radical court of their Presbyterian Church, of its power to give judgment in the first instance, in every case occurring within its bounds. Why should presbyteries be stripped of the right of giving judgment in this case, which was accorded them in all other cases? Were they not most likely to be the best judges of circumstances which must be purely local? Or, if they did wrong, if any one felt himself aggrieved, was there not an appeal in the usual way to the synod and the General Assembly? Why suspend the usual order of things?

On the other side, it was argued by Dr Finlayson and Dr Hill, that the General Assembly, and not the presbytery, was the radical court of the Church. History, they said, proved this. The Reformation was no sooner completed than the General Assembly met. It was many years afterwards before a presbytery was known. It was not the presbyteries that created the General Assembly; it was the General Assembly that created the presbyteries. All their powers flowed from it; the limit of their jurisdiction was fixed by it. There was nothing unconstitutional, therefore, in the General Assembly reserving to itself the right of giving judgment in regard to the erection of chapels of ease. Prudence required that the General Assembly should reserve the right. Presbyteries might be swayed by local passions and local interests, and the Church be weakened by unnecessary division.1

These arguments prevailed; and, according to the provisions of the Barrier Act, the overture was sent down to the presbyteries for consideration. When the subject was thus thrown abroad, it excited a hundred controversies in place of

one.

The flame was divided, without being lessened. When the Assembly met in 1797, it was found that thirty-four presbyteries had disapproved of the overture, and only thirty had approved of it, so that it ought to have been held as rejected by the votes of the whole Church. But, by a large majority, the Assembly resolved to retransmit it to the presbyteries; and the new experiment so succeeded that a majority was obtained, and in 1798 the overture was passed into a law.2

A missionary spirit, hitherto unfelt, now began to breathe over the Churches of the Reformation. The Apostolic Church 1 Cook's Life of Dr Hill.

2 Cook's Life of Dr Hill. Scots Magazine, vol. lix. p. 430

was a Missionary Church. The Church of Rome, amidst her corruption, had never allowed her missionary zeal to die. Her missionaries had penetrated the forests of Germany; had landed on the shores of England; had preached the gospel to the piratical Danes, who invocated Woden with bloody sacrifices before they launched their barks upon the sea. Even amidst the alarms of the Reformation, Rome could spare her bravest and her best for the missionary work. Xavier, the friend of Loyola, went forth as the apostle of the Indies; and, after a life-long work, sunk down and died under the very wall of China. Protestantism, hitherto busied with its own inner arrangements, had been forgetful of the vast outer fields of heathenism; but now a new-born zeal began to appear. Carey had left his cobbler's stall to assail Brahminism; and the unlettered but thoughtful man gave the Bible in their native tongue to myriads of idolaters. The reports of the Baptist Missionary Society were everywhere read; and though many sneered at the fond enthusiasts and their Utopian work, others saw in these things the spring of a better day.

The wave touched the shores of Scotland, and broke upon it. A missionary society was formed at Glasgow ; another at Edinburgh, at the first meeting of which Dr Erskine acted as president. His good name gave dignity and weight to everything with which he was connected. He was the friend and correspondent of Bishop Warburton. He was pronounced by Bishop Hurd to be, next to Warburton, the deepest divine he had ever known; but his reputation rested more upon his benevolence than his learning. There was nothing he would not do for the good of his kind. He was now an old man, thin, pale, and spectral-looking, greatly bent down by years, but evidently full of soul. Everybody loved and reverenced him. He has the high honour of being among the first advocates of missions in the Church.

Two synods brought the subject of Foreign Missions under the notice of the Assembly of 1796. The Synod of Fife asked the Assembly to consider by what means the Church of Scotland might most effectually contribute to the diffusion of the gospel over the world. The Synod of Moray went farther, and suggested that collections should be made throughout the Church to assist missionary societies in propagating the gospel among heathen nations. The great majority of the congregated divines treated the project as chimerical. Who 1 Cockburn's Memorials.

were they, that they should be able to turn the myriads of India from superstitions rooted so firmly in all their habits and thoughts? Let them make the attempt, and they would engraft upon the mind of the untutored Indian, European vices, without European virtues. The missionaries, it was said, were vainly endeavouring to reverse the natural order of things. Civilisation must precede Christianity. It was in vain to Christianize the savage. His simple nature could not comprehend the mysteries of our faith. It was not to the savage hordes of Africa or India that Paul directed his footsteps, but to the polished cities of Corinth, of Athens, and of Rome. But why should they go so far for a field of labour ? Was there nothing to do at home? Was there no heathenism at their own door? And would it not be worse than folly to spend their strength in India so long as a single unchristianized individual could be found in Scotland? In truth, the law forbade it, and would not suffer the collections which ought to be applied to the poor to be diverted into such a channel.

The most elaborate speech against missions was delivered by Mr Hamilton of Gladsmuir. When he had sat down, Dr Erskine rose. "Moderator, rax1 me that Bible," said he. The Bible was handed to him, and the passage was read in which there is a narrative of Paul's reception, after shipwreck, on the island of Melita, "where the barbarous people showed him no little kindness," and marvelled when he shook the venomous adder from his hand unharmed. "Think you," said Dr Erskine, "that when Paul wrought his miracles at Melita, and was supposed to be a god, he did not also preach Christ to the barbarians, and explain whose name it was through which such power was given unto men?"2 Dr Erskine's striking appeal did not avail. The Assembly, by fifty-eight to forty-four, dismissed the overtures, but at the same time recommended to all the members of the Church, in their different stations, to take every competent method of promoting, within the sphere of their influence, the knowledge of the gospel, and a just sense of the inestimable blessings it conveyed. The last clause was designed to soften the harshness of the first. But the Assembly must not be too severely condemned. It simply gave utterance to the almost universal sentiments of the time -the sentiments of good people in England as well as in Scot1 Scotticism for "reach"-hand, give.

2 Lives of Robert and James Haldane, pp. 134, 135.