cally a minor sect.* Congregationalists made up a vast majority of the colonists. Indeed that denomination was by the colonial government considered and treated as the established religion. In pursuing the reigning policy of the age to promote the settlement of the new plantations, the government foresaw that they would be chiefly settled by the prevailing denomination. Whatever encouragement, therefore, was necessary in those early periods for the introduction and support of religion, was less necessary for the reigning sect, than for minor ones. Their numbers constituted an obvious and sufficient resource. But it was presumed that Episcopalians would not be easily induced to remove far back into the remote settlements, without some reasonable hope and strong encouragement that they would be able to maintain the ministry and services to which they were so strongly attached. What expectations were wanting from their numbers, needed to be supplied in some other way. Accordingly, whilst only one right of land was given to the first settled minister, who, it was foreseen, would commonly be a Congregationalist, two rights were granted to Episcopalians, one, for a glebe, and the other for the benefit of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts.

"The first right, in most cases, fell into the possession of the ruling denomination; and, as it became, in fee, the property of the first settled minister, appears to have answered the very purpose which the grantors expected and designed.

"And under the expectation that the other rights would finally enable them to support their own ministers and services, several Episcopalians were induced to remove to the new townships. But, owing to a variety of causes, their hopes have been deferred, baffled, and nearly destroyed. And the posterity of those persons who were induced to move into a region so remote from the field of Episcopal ministrations, are reduced to depend for the supply of them, upon their own exertions, and the small remnant of property which has at length been recovered. And it is presumed that no objections will be urged against their receiving possession of this property, since every other publick right has been secured to its designated use and employment. "But, if any such objections should be raised, it is difficult to see what they can effect. From the report of the agents it will be seen, that every arrangement was made to have the decision which has

* We must again protest against the use of the term "sect" as applied to the Episcopal church. If our doctrines, government, discipline, and worship are those of the catholick church in the days of her apostolick purity, how are we a sect? We presume that the writers of these remarks would be the last to admit that we are a heresy," yet, if they will consult the New Testament, they will find that "sect" and "heresy" are synonymes. On this point we beg leave to refer our readers to our review of Bancroft's Sermons, (vol. ii. p. 379.) Let us leave this loose language to those whose principles tend to separation: ours are all fitted to produce union and harmony. Ed.

+ Here is again the same incautious admission. We assert, with confidence, that there is not one" sectarian," or heretical tenet to be found in our liturgy, ordinal, or articles. Ed.

been given, a final one. The cause was carried to the highest tribunal, was advocated by the most able counsel, and decided, after a full investigation, by a court, the very constitution of which places its judges far above all personal or state influence. And in this case it is

in vain to look for any sectarian prejudices,* for not only the same court, but the same judges, decided the glebe case against the Church, by which she is for ever deprived of the use of those lands,† which has now given judgment in favour of the Society for Propagating the Gospel.

"It is presumed that no persons would be disposed to urge objections against the recovery of the Propagation Lots, if they could could be made to believe that the benefits which will be derived from them in future, will be far greater than any which have been hitherto realized.

"It is confidently expected that this position will appear clearly and abundantly supported by a comparison of the nature and extent of the former and future good effects resulting from the application of the avails of these lands.

"No attempt will be made to undervalue or depreciate the benefits of education. Here the language of the most extravagant eulogy is scarcely the language of truth. The invaluable effects of a good education, and of the widest possible diffusion of it, are far beyond all human calculation. They are not to be made matter of cool mathematical calculation. They cannot be taken hold of, and counted and weighed. At the same time, they are known by effects too mighty to be overlooked, and are felt with an energy and a blessedness which cannot be mistaken. Parents cannot see how education blesses their offspring, but they can feel that under its influence they are growing up to make glad their hearts. Children cannot feel the hand which is moulding their characters and their hearts, but they find themselves growing up bold in thought, proud in feeling, aspiring in hope, and vigorous in enterprise. The secret influence of general and good education is noiseless and unnoticed in its progress, but its results are too mighty and too glorious to pass unregarded. The community is blessed by it, through all its limits. And our homes are made the pure, contented, and happy abodes which we find them, in a great measure by means of the education which has exalted their inmates.

"But are these blessings to be compared with those which flow from the diffusion of Christian knowledge and piety? Separate the ingredients of a nation's knowledge from the ingredients of a nation's morality, and what is their real estimation? They will prove the materials of ruin and desolation. Clear heads are dangerous pioneers to bad hearts. Religion alone can sanctify knowledge, and make her the handmaid of happiness. Politicians are mistaken when they refer our civil and social advantages chiefly to the diffusion of knowledge. It is much more fairly ascribed to the influence of religion.

* We should, in this case, have said, prejudices in favour of the Church. Ed. We had an idea that this decision was not on the merits of the case, but with regard to the person who had a right to bring the action. Ed.

It is this which has prevented the curses which are inseparable from a state of intellectual culture, if moral culture does not keep pace with it. Intelligence elevates the character, but religion preserves it, when thus elevated, pure, and refined, and pre-eminently happy.

"Other securities were provided for the diffusion of the less valuable of these blessings. The lands in question were consecrated to the higher and better purpose. For many years they have been diverted from their designated and proper channel, and it is highly satisfactory to the friends of the Church, that although they have not been suffered "to make glad the city of our God," they have been watering a fair garden, and maturing valuable fruits. And, on the other hand, they cannot be brought to believe that good men will ever resist the application of these lands to the bigh uses of Christianity, upon the pretence that it will be robbing the state of a great benefit. Surely the good sense and the happy experience of the people of Vermont will not suffer their schools to languish because lands, to which they had no legal right, are withdrawn from them. They cannot be so ungrateful and unreasonable as to charge upon Episcopalians the fault of any injury which schools may suffer from giving up an income to which their claim was unrighteous and illegal.

"We are bound, therefore, to believe that new efforts* will be made in behalf of schools; and in addition to the blessings which the state will derive from their increased prosperity, it will find its moral and religious character very much elevated and improved by the labours of those clergymen whom these funds will support. The sum of good will thus be greatly increased; and the community will receive unexpected benefits from a decision which some affect to believe will be a great disadvantage to it.

"The grantors of the publick rights appear to have been impressed with a very correct sense of the general advantages of both these methods of diffusing knowledge, and to have given no very equivocal expression of their estimate of the value of the one method above the other, when they assigned one right to schools, and three to the support of religion. In the course of events two of these have been secured for the benefit of schools, and one for the use of a minister. Now if it were a question with the community at large how the remaining right should be disposed of, we cannot conceive that it would completely reverse the decision of those excellent men, by giving three rights to the less valuable object, and one only to religion; more especially as the doing of this would divest one denomination of Christians of two portions of land intended for them. It would surely seem to your committee that all may well rest contented in the present equal division of these rights between these invaluable objects.

"These hopes may be rendered less sanguine, by the objection that the prejudices and partialities of the people are such that they will

"It may not be improper to remark, that the annual amount secured to schools by law, is not in the smallest degree affected by their being deprived of the use of these lands. The only effect of this loss to the schools, will be that the taxation in certain towns will be slightly increased."

not attend the ministrations of the Episcopal clergy. Still there are some few individuals scattered in almost every town, who decidedly prefer that mode of discipline and worship. And, in a region which boasts of perfect toleration, it ought certainly to give general satisfaction and pleasure, that any part of our population will at length have it in their power to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences. But your committee are unwilling to believe that the alleged prejudices are so strong. They would deem it highly uncharitable, and would be exceedingly sorry to believe, that a church, whose doctrines are so scriptural and pure, whose government is so excellent and ancient, whose services are so devotional and sublime, can be the object of such extreme dislike that people will not attend upon its ministry! They are persuaded, that the more the services of the Church are known, the better her doctrines are understood, and the oftener its ministry is attended, the less will prejudice have to say against it. They cannot help thinking and maintaining that the Episcopal church in this country and in England possesses, on the ground of the learning and piety of their clergy, and the abundance of their zeal and good works, in the bible and missionary cause, a claim upon the good feelings of Christian people, which will forbid them to avoid or oppose the clergymen who may minister in Vermont.

But it may still be insisted that such are the existing partialities and prejudices in the state, that the Episcopal clergy will not find congregations. If we are compelled to believe it, who are in fault? If the people will not allow themselves to be relieved from a part of the expense of supporting clergymen; if they refuse to hear those who are sent among them by means of the avails of the Church lands, areEpiscopalians to blame? Is the opprobium to be cast upon them of depriving the state of great and extensive benefits? Most assuredly, if the people of the state do not derive the greatest benefit from the expected application of the property which has hitherto gone to the support of schools, it will be owing to a cause which Episcopalians, more than any other persons, will have reason to deplore.

"It is very natural to presume, thaf amongst the variety of remarks which the recovery of the 'Propagation Lots' will call forth, the motives and designs of Episcopalians will be subjected to animadversion and censure. It becomes their duty, therefore, if they are able, to vindicate their motives and intentions. And nothing can be easier than to set them above the reach of reasonable suspicion or reproach. "It surely can scarcely be objected against a man that he has been endeavouring to secure what he really believed was his honest right! Episcopalians have all along been persuaded that their claim to the use of these lands was unquestionable. The most eminent jurists advised them to prosecute those claims, confidently predicting ultimate success. And the Society in England gladly relinquished to them their title, and delegated to them their powers. Is it surprising, then, or blame-worthy, that they have have made an attempt at securing such a valuable extent of property? Would they have been doing their duty, either to themselves or their posterity, if they had suffered these rights to have fallen into neglect and forgetfulness? And especially when the condition and relative circumstances of Episcopalians

are regarded; when it is recollected that they are a scattered and opposed people; that they can seldom collect numbers sufficient to support a minister; that they are warmly attached to very peculiar rites and observances, which none but their own clergy can administer ;— can it excite surprise, or incur blame, that they have exerted themselves to procure a provision for their ministers which will in some degree obviate the difficulties resulting from their small numbers, and scattered situation? In such a case, is there a man living, or a society existing, that would not have been as active and energetick as the Episcopalians are stated to have been?

Again, certain views have been presented of the benefits which not only Episcopalians, but the community at large, it is hoped, will derive from the recovery of these lands. Now Episcopalians are fully persuaded of the correctness of these views. And there can be no doubt but their conceptions of the extent of these benefits are quite as glowing as they should be. It may safely be granted that they are highly exaggerated and extravagant; that imagination has outstripped the pace of sober calculation; and that the good which will actually be secured, will not be, by any means, commensurate with their sanguine expectations.

"But, however false and visionary these views may prove to be, they certainly form a perfect exculpation for Episcopalians. Benevolence, consistency, and religion, alike call upon them to exert themselves very actively in securing benefits which they believe to be exceedingly great. But their views cannot certainly be considered altogether visionary. And far from being blamed for labouring to send abroad the services and the ministrations of a church, which they honour and love, and regard as a peculiar safeguard to the most precious doctrines of the protestant faith, they should be highly commended for it.

"But this point is capable of being placed in a light still more convincing. From the report of the agents it will be particularly observed, that the first movement towards securing the Society lands in the United States to the Protestant Episcopal Church, did not originate with the members or friends of the Church, but with the officers of the Society. The secretary was ordered to correspond with Episcopalians in this country, and to offer them for the support of their clergy, the possession and use of all the property which was vested in that Society before the revolution. It appears that they were ignorant of the extent of property which had been vested in them, but felt confident that they should still hold it, whatever might prove its amount, under the treaty of 1783. This important fact will serve several valuable purposes. It will show that the right of the Society to the lands which have recently been recovered, appeared very obvious to its officers long before it had excited any controversy. And it will ex culpate the Church from any blame which might be supposed to attach to her, for prosecuting the claim which was so freely and generously resigned to her. What else could her friends have done? If they had refused the generous offer, it would most probably have been of no benefit to the state; for the Society would have prosecuted its claims in some other way, and the lands lost to the Church