times were such, that it was difficult, and almost impracticable, to observe the due medium. They were critical and perilous in an eminent degree. To enter into a minute detail of the state of parties at that time, would produce a long and unprofitable digression. Yet, a brief sketch is necessary to point out the difficulties which our author had to encounter; and to explain, in some degree, the circumstances which led to his change of religious connexion. For this purpose, we must go a little back in the history, particularly the Ecclesiastical history, of our country.

After the gradual abolition of Popery in Scotland, and the introduction of Presbytery, chiefly through means of the intrepid reformer, John Knox, in the year 1561, when the model of that reformed church was first settled, several attempts had been made to revive Popery; and when these failed, to introduce Episcopacy there, so obnoxious to the people of that country, and especially in that age. During the reigns of the unhappy Mary, and of her effeminate son, James the First, of England, the struggle between the opposite parties was constant, and carried on with various success; though, upon the whole the Protestants and Presbyterians preserved the ascendency in re

spect of numbers and character, if not always in point of authority and influence. The pedantic and unstable monarch, whom we have just mentioned; and who, in the beginning of his reign, had by solemn oath established Presbytery in Scotland, afterwards endeavoured to establish Episcopacy in the same kingdom; apparently altered his design, and again professed a singular regard for the Presbyterian establihment; and, having ascended the throne of Britain, was so unmindful of his sacred engagements, and so ungrateful to those who were the instruments of preserving his infant-life, and of securing for him the Scottish crown, that he established Episcopacy, and excited cruel persecution, in that part of his dominions.

His son, Charles the First, equally zealous for prelacy, and who was influenced by worthless ministers, and a Popish queen, threw the whole kingdom into a ferment, and at length brought himself to the scaffold. Quarrelling with his Parliament he tried to govern without them; and the two parties came to an open rupture. Charles endeavoured to perfect the absurd scheme, which his father had formed, but had not been able to accomplish, of establishing episcopacy effectually among the Scots, contrary to the sentiments of the greater part of

them, and to the acts of their free ecclesiastical assemblies. By his own authority, he imposed on that people the English Liturgy ; an imposition which they almost universally resisted. The General Assembly met soon after at Glasgow, in the year 1638, and formally abolished Episcopacy; and their sentence was approved and confirmed by Parliament. The illadvised and obstinate monarch, who was an enemy to the religious and civil rights of his subjects, attempted to enforce his favourite scheme by the power of the sword, and levied an army to crush supposed rebellion; but, in fact, to support lawless prerogative. Twice from selfish motives he consented to a peace, thinking that he would engage the Scots to assist him against the English Parliament and army. After several battles with the Parliamentary forces, Charles went over to the Scots army at Newark; who, while they treated him with becoming respect, put a guard upon him, and, in reality, made him a prisoner. At length, they delivered him up to the Commissioners of the Parliament, who conducted him to Holmbyhouse, where he was closely confined. During the confinement of the king, the Duke of Hamilton, by his interest and intrigues, prevailed with the Convention of Estates to raise an army, and appoint himself General of it, in or

der to rescue Charles from his captivity. The Engagement, as it was called, had a specious appearance and deceived many, who sympathized with the captive monarch, and were averse from carrying matters to the last extremity; and the rather, that they saw the rising predominance of a republican and levelling spirit.

At this critical and alarming juncture, Leighton, disgusted with animosity, unable, perhaps, to ascertain the point where resistance to the authority of a prince becomes lawful and necessary, and probably dreading the downfal of monarchy, declared for the engagement. This was the first step towards leaving his old connexions; and there were several circumstances which seem, in a particular manner, to have biassed his mind. Those of his parishioners who desired the king's liberty, and took an active part for procuring it, were in general men of bad morals. Their minister reproved them publickly for their wickedness, and thus incurred their displeasure and resentment. His simple declaration for the Engagement offended the rest; so that he was placed between two fires. The more moderate of the Episcopal party, and of respectable character, commenced a flattering correspondence with him, and endeavour

ed to draw him to their side. His own brother, Sir Elisha Leighton, a man of great parts and vivacity, as well as of considerable address and cunning, laboured to prejudice his mind against the Presbyterians. It is not improbable that some of them envied his singular talents, and that others charged him with the want or weakness of public spirit. In short, judging his usefulness to be at an end, he was induced to resign his charge; and seems to have intended to retire from public life. Indeed, he was of the most recluse habits; and of a turn somewhat ascetic, without being morose. Though our author did not then fully join the opposite party, and never approved any of their violent measures, he was supposed, with good reason, to have changed his connexions. The Presbyterians denounced him as an apostate, and the Episcopalians welcomed him as a convert. Impartiality obliges us to say, that he ought to have stated publickly and plainly, which he never did, the grounds of his separation; and that the change itself is the less matter of surprise, as he seems not to have been in his first connexion thoroughly a Presbyterian, nor in his second entirely an Episcopalian. He was, therefore, disliked by the violent of both parties. Yet, he was held in such general estimation, and acted with such prudence,