for the repeal of the Act 10th of Queen Ann, had not been relinquished. Some public bo dies in the country, and more especially many private individuals, and self-constituted socie ties, from time to time, expressed their aversion to the existing law; and through the influence of those in the inferior judicatories, who agreed with them in opinion, overtures on the subject were presented to the notice of the General Assembly. These overtures were generally received with suspicion, and alarm by the party which, under the late Principal Robertson, had acquired, and was anxious to preserve, the majority in that house. In the course of the discussions which took place, arguments were brought forward which va ried with the complexion of the times. It was contended, on the one hand, that patron. age, whether good or bad in itself, is the law of the land, and that, as loyal and peaceable subjects, we are bound to submit to its au thority; that the circumstances of an esta blished church are materially different from those of one unconnected with the state, de pending for the support of its ministers on

the voluntary contributions of the people; that when the state makes a fixed provision for an order of men to officiate in holy things, the laws of the state should regulate the mode of their introduction to their offices; that the clerical character is in danger of being degraded, and that polite literature and liberality of sentiment may be retarded in their progress, if the clergy are laid under the necessity of accommodating their discourses and their style of manners, to the taste of the vulgar, to whom they are to look up for preferment; that the powers of patrons are not formidable, since their choice is limited to qualified persons, who must previously have the stamp of the church upon them in their license to preach, and must afterwards be taken upon trials, aud approven of, before they can receive induction to their charges.

Such arguments as these our author and his friends were not afraid to meet and to combat. They solemnly abjured every intention of resisting the government, or disturbing the peace of their country. Patronage, they acknowledged to be the law esta

blished; but they contended that the same authority which gave it existence was suffi cient to repeal it, and that to take legal and constitutional steps for the repeal of any law, the pressure of which may be felt, is the undoubted and unalienable privilege of Britons. They argued that it had uniformly been the sense of the church, that this law should be repealed, since, 'from the date of its enactment to the year 1784, every general assembly had directed and empowered its commission to make application to the King and Parliament for redress of the grievance of patronage, in case a favourable opportunity for so doing should occur during the subsistence of that commission. It was contended, and by none more strenuously than by Dr Johnston, that the Revolution settlement was intended to give a permanent form to our constitution both in church and state; that the platform of our ecclesiastical government then received an appropriate and indelible character; that the plan of settling ministers according to the Act 1690, became a part of those rights and privileges which the articles of Union

between the two kingdoms had declared to be fixed and unalterable; that an Act passed five years after, under the influence of a tory ministry, enemies to liberty, and to the Hanoverian succession, was to be regarded as a breach of the compact between the two. great contracting parties, and, if acquiesced in, without remonstrance, might serveás a precedent for bereaving us of all the freedom and glory which have descended to us as an inheritance purchased by the struggles, the wis dom, and the blood of our fathers. This law alone, it was said, has occasioned the seces sions from the church which have taken place; and that if secessions shall continue and increase, the great body of the people may at tach themselves to incapable instructors, and the clergy of the establishment left without flocks, over whom they may exert their influence, may, by the state, be regarded as of no use, and as having forfeited their claim to protection and support. As to their im provement in learning and politeness, that may be expected to keep pace with the progress of society, and can neither be acceler

ated nor retarded by the laws which regulate the mode of their introduction to office; and besides, if at present they are not tempted servilely to court popular applause, it must be allowed they are in danger of despising it too much, and of assimilating their manners to those of the great, and becoming the submissive sycophants of men in power. As to the powers of the church to put her stamp on those eligible to the sacred office, and to judge of their fitness for particular charges, this is a two edged weapon, and may be wielded on either side of the contest; if it be at all a check, it is a check on public bodies, as well as on patrons, in selecting the objects of their favour.

On such grounds as these, the opposition to patronage was long conducted. But the friends of that law continuing to fortify themselves, by disseminating their principles among the younger clergy and by the countenance which they received from the officers of state, and from the landed interest, the opposition became gradually feebler, and was soon to

d