on the cheek." Now, I do not say that rudeness should be displayed on either side; but I affirm that it is ridiculous, nay much worse than ridiculous, for the aggressor, after once and again putting forth all his strength to injure his neigh bour, to preach up to him meekness, politeness, self-command, all the placid, amiable, and pretty virtues." P. 8. "It is recorded by Mr. Cecil, in his life of the worthy Mr. Cadogan, that when the latter was looking at the Cathedral Church of Glasgow, a Church in which he perfectly knew that the Gospel was most ably and faithfully preached, he could not help exclaiming, O that Episcopacy were established in it! To this excellent but bigotted Episcopaliau, and to his no less excellent but no less bigotted biographer, it seems to have given very little satisfaction that the Gospel was preached with a degree of purity, faithfulness, and ability, seldom equalled in any Church, unless Episcopacy, with all its ceremonies and trappings, had gone along with it. And if a single Cathedral Church, in that division of the island extorted such an exclamation from so holy a man, what feelings may be supposed to agitate the breasts of the less holy but equally bigoted partisans of episcopacy, on contemplating all those venerable piles of ancient Caledonia consecrated to the simple rites of Presbyterian worship? It is well if they do not say of Scotland as was once said by a reverend Divine in reference to one of its country towns which was particularly renowned for the wickedness of its inhabitants. When,' said he, Satan shewed our Saviour all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them, saying, All these will I give thee if thou wilt fall down and worship me,' he clapped his thumb on Kirriemuir, and said that he reserved that for himself, as being part of his grandfather's inheritance !' I have certainly been told that it is no unusual spectacle to see one of those high toned Churchmen of the South, as he moves along the streets of Edinburgh, scowl upon the most learned and pious Clergyman of the Establishment, if he happen to pass, as being an odious Dissenter. Scarce so ludicrous as this was the conduct of every strutting Frenchman that came into Britain some years ago, as a prisoner of war, who, in imitation of Columbus, on his arrival in this New World, took possession of the soil, as belonging to his master, and as constituing almost already a part of Le Grand Empire. The establishment of a hierarchy in Scotland, is a measure which, they cannot dissemble, is much wished 6 for by every sighing heart among them. See the mighty anticipations of their imagination! Le grand Empire is just going to be established in the North.' Already there is erected a camera obscura on the top of Lambeth palace, where the Prelates of England, sitting in darkness around the white-faced board, survey before them the fields of green Albyn, and have ere now parcelled them out into productive dioceses—already full five hundred organs are building for her parishes, and twenty score of Cassocks making for her Clergy, and one dozen of nice wigs for her venerable dignitaries. Already the people are preparing to receive us—they invite us-let us go "Stand aback, clear the way, for bishops, rectors, curates, With their elegant appendices, the tithes, and the poor rates.' "But leaving the Ecclesiastical Polity in Scotland as settled beyond recall, let us return to our Reviewer, and his claim upon the Colonies will fall to be considered in due course. My opinion of the Christian Remembrancer, and of its Reviews, is very much that which certain North British Journalists have expressed in reference to the British Critic. Their language I beg leave to apply (mutato nomine) in the present case. 66 6 ་ It is recorded of Antisthenes, a Greek philosopher, that hearing one day of his being praised by certain bad meu, he exclaimed, Why, what crime have I committed?' Had the conductors of the Christian Remembrancer happened to bestow upon us any laudatory epithets, we should certainly have felt as Antisthenes is said to have done, and immediately set about the work of self-examination. And, on the same principle, we consider it as a testimony-so far as the testimony of such writers is good for any thing-to the soundness of our views, when we happen to be the objects of their censure and rebuke, The higher their tone of approbation, the worse in general should we be disposed to think of ourselves; the severer their animadversions, and the more vulgar their abuse, the greater reason do we find to be satisfied with our sentiments and conduct; so that, hereafter, they may know exactly how to wound and how to gratify our feelings. Indeed so completely erroneous do we deem them on the subjects of ecclesiastical government, genuine religion, and practical piety, that such books, relating to these, as they condemn, we are generally disposed, to purchase or to recommend. And this rule we should uni5 D 2 formly observe, were it not that they are sometimes as stupid as they are heretical; and talk highly of those publications which, on their own professed principles, they should ridicule and vituperate. According to them, baptism and regeneration are the same; justification by faith only is a gross delusion; Bible Societies are destructive of all religion and good order missions to the heathen indicate nothing but fanaticism and folly; salvation out of the Episcopal Church is next to impossible; zeal for the Gospel, and for vital godliness, is the most ridiculous and the most dangerous of all possible things; schools where children are taught to read any other books, or to learn any other catechism, but those sanctioned by the Church, and by the Bishops, are nests of disaffection and sedition; and every one who dares to resist even the most unprincipled, oppressive, and bloody tyrant, provided he be a legitimate sovereign, and the head of the Church, is a traitor to the cause of truth and good government, and a contemner of the scriptural doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, and deserves to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. By men of such principles we must always reckon it an honour to be attacked; and we beg leave to return the editors of the Christian Remembrancer our warmest thanks for that distinguished mark of disapprobation which they have graciously conferred upon us.' "Holding such sentiments, I cannot be supposed to have offered strictures on the Review in question, because I conceived it at all formidable in itself, as far as talent is concerned, but because the work in which it appears has high pretensions as the organ of a certain powerful party in the English Church, because it is of great repute among many members of that Church in this place, and because it may be circulated among persons of influence on the Bench or in the Cabinet, and may tend to prejudice our Colonists against the claims of the Scottish Church and Clergy in in the remote possessions and dependencies of the empire.' P. 11. " "This naturally brings me forward to a second charge which I have to prefer against my Reviewer, and that is party feeling. A Reviewer ought to be unbiassed by preconceived opinions, or favourite systems. He ought to bring a free and unoccupied mind to the exercise of criticism. Holding himself forth as the guide of public opinion, his readers have a a right to expect that he will not lead them astray in consequence of any private and personal leanings. But is this verified in the case before us? By no means. Indeed the Magazine was established for the very purpose of supporting certain views of ecclesiastical polity, and no one has to proceed far in the perusal of the Review in question without perceiving what those views are. The Editor, his coadjutors, and the Reviewer, are all Episcopalians and avowed abettors of Episcopacy. I remember some years ago of going to see an exhibition of wild animals, when, after describing several of them to me, the keeper, proceeding to the next, said with a stentorian voice, This, Sir, is the Nhil Ghau, or Horned Horse,-the likest of any known animal to that famous quadruped the Unicorn, only that he has got two horns.' How similar must be the exclamation of all on reading the piece under consideration! Can they help crying out, This, ladies and gentlemen, is an impartial arbiter between the contending parties, only his predilections are all on one side! It is told of a certain Irish Judge, not much famed for impartiality, that one day on observing a witness come into court with one of his jaws swelled to an immoderate size, he said to a Lawyer who happened to be near him, That fellow would make an excellent lawyer.' What makes you think so?' said the Lawyer, Why,' said the Judge, because he has a great deal of jaw.' 'I think,' replied the Lawyer, he would make as good a judge.' How is that?' asked the Judge. 'Because,' said the Lawyer, his jaw is all on the one side.' So it is with the Christian ReTheir membrancer and its Reviewers. jaw is all on the one side. And though I had reasoned like a Plato, and displayed throughout the eloquence of a Demosthenes or a Cicero, the result would have I was on the wrong side, been the same. and consequently nothing could be right about me or my cause." P. 15. This is a specimen of Dr. Burns when he is engaging an anonymous reviewer; at times his displeasure vents itself upon personages of much higher importance, and he writes in the following strain; "But observe the insidiousness of the Reviewer in apologising for not quoting my remarks on Mr. Milne's extract from the New York Magazine, on the principle of regard for my reputation! Dr. Burns,' says he, 'offers some remarks on this statement, but they are conceived in such a spirit, and uttered in such a tone, that we will not injure him by reciting them.' Most generous soul! How shall I utter the abundance of my gratitude ?-But as I happen not to be so jealous of my reputation as my Reviewer, I beg leave to present my readers with the remarks in question, although at the time I wrote my Letter to Mr. Milne, I only knew the leading facts of the case, but have now obtained minute and correct information. Drs. Middleton and, Bryce went to India in the same vessel, and from some cause or other, sparring commenced during the voyage. Perhaps the celebrated writer on the Greek article and dignitary of the Church of England had been disposed to assume a consequence, to take a lead, to aspire to an influence, and to practice an interference inconsistent with the rights of others' which warmed the blood of the Scotsman, who, though only a simple Presbyter, belonging to the Kirk, yet had some little pretensions both as a scholar of distinguished eminence and as the author of a pretty sizeable volume on our Anglo-Indian empire. Certain it is that the very breeze which wafted them to our eastern shores was impregnated with the virus of religigions animosity, and no sooner had they landed on Asiatic territory than it burst forth in all its malignant forms. The Bishop opened the Church, and the Presbyter a temporary Kirk. Unfortunately for his Lordship, the Scotch population of Calcutta is too numerous, too rich, and too respectable to be easily dispensed with, and no doubt he was vexed to see them flocking in crowds, to a • Presbyterian Dissenting Meeting House,' when the portals of a Church stood open inviting their approach. All these,' says your anonymous author, before the arrival of Dr. Bryce, were in harmony with the Church of England, and willingly united in all its forms of worship. The first effect, there fore, of this measure, was to create a schism where it found none, and in the person of Dr. Bryce not only to create, but to foment division,' As the Doctor went to India for the sake of the many Scotch who were settled there,' it was naturally to be expected that they would make use of the religious instructor who had been provided for them, and as he had no authority to preach in a Church but in a Kirk, what remained for them to do but to assemble in the Kirk for the purpose of 6 hearing his admonitions? For want of a Scottish Divine, those who belonged to the Scotch establishment had laudably conformed to the episcopal regime, but as soon as they were blest with a pastor of their own, of course they resorted to their own place of worship. All this was mor tifying to the Bishop, and he could not refrain from introducing the Presbyterian Dissenting Teacher into his sermon from the pulpit. This was an honour which the The meaning of the passage in italics is somewhat obscure, for Dr. Burns cannot intend to confess that the Presbyterian Clergyman at Calcutta is as much a Prelate in his own congregation, as the Bishop in the diocese at large. We all know that in fact and in practice the Presbyterian parity (not purity, as our printer rather unhappily made us say) never did exist. Calvin and Knox were both Bishops and Archbe conferred by the possession of bishops, as far as such titles can power and authority, and preeminence over their respective Churches. And we suspect that Dr. Burns is something of a Bishop, subscribed two instruments thereof in the presence of the Lords of the Council, who witnessed the same; and his Majesty was if not a Pope, in his own way, although his head be not ornamented with a nice wig. But leaving the learned Doctor's meaning in the pleased to order, that one of the said in darkness with which he has thought fit to shroud it, we must regret that any leader of a Christian flock should betray such bitter and such protracted animosity against a fellow-creature, as that which appears in the long diatribe against the Bishop of Calcutta. Fifteen pages of the subscription pamphlet are devoted to a reconsideration of the dispute between the Bishop and Dr. Brice: a dispute with which the New Brunswickers had nothing to do, till their attention was directed to it by the charitable zeal of Dr. Burns. We certainly shall not follow so bad an example. But we think that the Doctor might have softened his style before he proceeded to pass sentence upon his reviewers for Billingsgate. We shall now introduce our readers to the more important part of Dr. Burns's pamphlet, the part in which he abstains from abuse of other men and other Churches, and contents himself with urging the claims and merits of his own. Speaking of the articles of union between England and Scotland, he says, "So faithfully are these Articles complied with that the former is the very first oath which each new Sovereign has been obliged to take at his accession to the throne, and before his proclamation. And we may all remember that it was taken by George the Fourth, as King of Great Britain, in the first Privy Council which he held, and the day before he was publicly proclaimed. Thus we read in the Courier, of 1st February, 1820-London Gazette Extraordinary, 30th January. "At the Court at Carlton House, &c., "His Majesty, at his first coming into the Council, was this day pleased to declare, that understanding that the law requires that he should, at his Accession to the Crown, take and subscribe the oath relating to the security of the Church of Scotland, he was now ready to do it this first opportunity, which his Majesty was graciously pleased to do, according to the forms used by the law of Scotland, and struments be transmitted to the Court of Session, to be recorded in the Books of Sederunt, and afterwards to be forthwith lodged in the Public Register of Scotland, and that the other of them remain among the records of the Council, and be entered in the Council Book.' "By these Acts it is clear that there is not one iota of superiority either in rank, authority, rights, or privileges granted to the one National Church above the other— that they are equally essential to the constitution of Great Britain-and that the security of the Church of Scotland is provided for before that of the Church of England. It is equally clear that these Acts make no provision for any claim upon the Colonies being urged by the one more than by the other. But as all Colonies after such Union became equally the property of Scotland and England, of course the Church of the former kingdom acquired the same right to establishment with the Church of the latter, and nothing but the undue influence of Ecclesiastics in Parliament would ever have led to a different arrangement. The Reviewer is quite mistaken when he asserts that the civil establishment of religion in the Colonies, must depend, not on the laws of England or Scotland, but on the terms agreed upon on the first settlement or surrender of those Colonies.' This was so far true in the case of Canada, and accounts for the establishment of Romish Episcopacy in that Colony. But in other instances the King's Proclamation settles the general principles to be acted on in reference to the religion of the Colonies; and I have not the least hesitation in saying that had the cry been as loud, bold, and incessant' at the original settlement of British North America, as it was previous to the renewal of the Indian Charter,' the same ecclesiastical policy would have been pursued by his Majesty's government. But unfortunately the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland seems to have felt little interest in the enlargement of its sphere of jurisdiction, and thus in too many instances has allowed its rights and privileges to be most shamefully invaded. In Nova Scotia the Church of Scotland is not recognized in any shape by the laws, and though there be one place of worship in that province which has an ordained Clergyman of the Scottish Church for its Minister, who, as such, receives a salary from Government, yet formerly it was designated a Protestant Dissenting Meeting-House, having been supported by American Congregationalists as well as Scottish Presbyterians; and if nothing is done by the Legislature to maintain its claims as a branch of the Church of Scotland, it will probably never lose its original character. In this province, these matters are better arranged. Some of the leading men at its first settlement were true sons of the Scottish Church, and employed their influence, with some success, in order to have her rights duly recognized. Indeed the first Church Grant obtained in this place after the separation of the province from Nova Scotia was in the name of certain trustees for the benefit of those adhering to the Protestant principles approved of by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and the probability is that had they completed the building then founded, and possessed the means of endowing it, the Church of England would have had only the shadow of an existence in this city at the present day. It is clear, then, that there was nothing in the original constitution or first settlement of this province to have prevented an equal recognition of both Churches-that the Provincial Legislature has it in its power to enact any laws with respect both to civil and religious institutions, not inconsistent with the laws of Great Britain and that, by a judicious application of the best parts of the English and Scotch law, the administration of justice in this country might be conducted according to principles and forms quite superior to those of either division of the Parent State. But the rights of the Church of Scotland have in fact been recognized to a certain extent in many of the Colonies, and therefore, I have only to ask, why are they not recognized to the full extent? If the principle is admitted in so far as certain privileges are secured to that Church which are denied to other denominations, why is it not allowed an entire and efficient establishment?" P. 55. considered as justly and strictly belonging to the national character. The question is seldom agitated till a Clergyman has actually commenced his labours and begins to feel himself opposed and connteracted whenever the jealousy of Episcopalians happens to be awakened, either by his superior talents, his success, or his practical assertion of his rights. Then it is too late to correct the evil. Division is created and fomented, and the unfortunate individual who has been expatriated in the hope of doing good to his fellow creatures in distant lands, finds himself scowled upon by the men in power as wanting in respect to the local authorities, and exposed the hapless victim of malignant insinnation and cruel invective. And this will ever be the case till the causes of discord are removed, as is now happily exemplified in India, by that equalization of rights for which I contend." P. 60. "I beg it, however, to be distinctly understood that in objecting to the arrangement which has taken place in regard to the religion of the Colonies, I do not mean to blame the Government or Legislature alone. The people at large in such a country as North Britain, and the natives of that country abroad, as well as the General Assembly, ought to have exercised their right, and spoken aloud to their rulers and lawgivers, of the duty, and the importance, and the necessity of securing that place and that respectability to their Church in foreign parts, which she has in their native land; and, therefore, whatever guilt attaches to the indifference which has been shewn to that object, must be "Two circumstances ought to be considered in determining the political expediency of the measure-the one is, that the very country in which that Church has been allowed to have its full effect has ever been distinguished for its loyalty-the other is, that many most valuable settlers have been lost to this and the other provinces merely because no provision has been made for the religious rites of their native country,' deservedly interwoven' with their habits and with their hearts, whilst many of those who remain, for the same reason, fall into habits of listlessness and manifest symptoms of discontent totally incompatible with strenuous exertion. Wherever the Church of England is established there will always be a large proportion of dissenters; this must be particularly the case in the mixed population of foreign settlements whose religious habits and attachments are generally formed before they leave their home, and, therefore, in giving an English establishment alone, Government obtains little sway over the hearts or affections of the people." P. 62. These declarations are entitled to a careful consideration: they give us fair warning of Dr. Burns's intentions; and assure the friends of the Episcopal cause, that every inch of ground will be disputed by the Colonial Dissenters. The inbefore us, must render him a comtemperance of the disputant now paratively powerless foe. Governors, and Privy Councillors, and Cabinet Ministers, must have the same respect for the Doctor's un |