given below,* will show how the question of spiritual independence was stated by an English Churchman, and may interest the reader all the more that it is singled out for special commendation by Dr. Chalmers, "What I particularly like is your selection of the one point of jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other of non-intrusion." The circulation of this appeal drew forth most gratifying testimonies from the members of the Evangelical party in the Church. When the Free Church deputation visited Bath, five or six of these ministers solicited an interview, and one of them, says Dr. Begg, "opened one of our meetings with prayer." The appeal that had pleased Dr. Chalmers appeared to him also so excellent that, at the next meeting of the General Assembly, he read the greater part of it, adding, "I have seen the men from whom this document proceeds, and I never met with more amiable or Christianlike men."

But while English Churchmen, to some extent, gave their sympathy and support, it was among the Nonconformists that the real success of the movement was met with. "You have heard," said Dr. Begg, "that the Mayor of Manchester, an eminent British merchant, the Mayor of Birmingham, and the Mayor of Bath, all presided at our meetings, and all these gentlemen are members of the Independent denomination. We also found strenuous support from many eminent ministers of that body." So it was also among the Baptists. "In a word,

all the men who held the fundamental truths of the Bible, more or less, came to our assistance." There was one denomination, however, which stood out beyond all others as the friends of the Free Church-the Wesleyan Methodists.

It is impossible to give here any detailed account of what was done in the different localities. Dr. Nathaniel Paterson, of Glasgow, and Mr. Buchan, of Hamilton, visited the North of

"We feel that the claim of the civil court to enforce ordination to the ministry, whether directly or indirectly, under any possible circumstances, is an unjustifiable usurpation in a matter purely spiritual; and, consequently, we judge that those of our Northern brethren, who view the subject in the same light with ourselves, could not, as Christian men, do otherwise than resign their connection with the State."

England, and obtained, as the result of their different meetings, the sum of £1200. Two enthusiastic meetings were held in Manchester, and on the following Sabbath collections were made in thirty-five places of worship in the town, amounting to upwards of £4000.* These are examples of what was going on. During the first summer, it was stated that £20,000 was raised in aid of the Free Church, but greater things were expected. Mr. Bunting, the generous and large-hearted friend of the movement, proposed that a hundred pulpits+ should be occupied in one day in London to "enforce those Bible principles on which we have taken our stand, and to obtain additional collections."

With these introductory notices, we now submit to the reader the statement of Mr. Burns, of Kirkliston, who, in 1843, was minister of London Wall Church, and was honoured to take a leading part in the work, in England.

* Report of Glasgow Assembly, 1843, p. 85. The above sum of £4000 must have included several large subscriptions given privately, and collections at the public meetings.

+ Ibid. p. 90.

XXXVIII. LONDON REMINISCENCES, 1843.

By the Rev. JAMES C. BURNS, Kirkliston.

OUR modest "miniature" Disruption in the Presbytery of London took place within a month of the great event in Edinburgh. It might, and probably would have been warded off till the April following, when the Synod was indicted to meet at Liverpool, but for the circumstance that the induction of a minister (the Rev. James Ferguson) into a vacant charge made it necessary to determine in what sense the "formula" was to be understood, alike by the presiding minister in putting the questions prescribed by it, and by him in answering them. The point at issue was-" Is the Church of Scotland, as by law established," the present Establishment? or is it the Establishment as it was till the 18th of last month, alias the disestablished, "the Free Church of Scotland"? Though the Moderator refused to act, in taking a vote on the question thus raised, the Presbytery acted for itself, superseding him in his office, and resolving to obliterate from its title the words which up till that time had given it a nominal connection with the mother Church. This resolution-moved by Mr. Hamilton-and carried, was the solution of all our other controversies, and brought to a speedy end our collisions with the "moderate" brethren, which had, of late, not been few, for it relieved us at once of their company; in a very short time after the vote was declared, they rose simultaneously from their seats and departed. The only further "conflict" which took place was one of muscular force between the Clerk and one of the out-going minority (the most athletic of the number); the former tightly, though stealthily holding, the latter stoutly grasping at the Presbytery minute-book as it lay open on the table, with the result that it remained in possession of its lawful owners. Its brazen clasps saved it.

That was a truly happy event, making the day and the place memorable-the 13th of June 1843-in the Scots' Church at Woolwich. Among other spectators or participants of the scene, were General Anderson, R.A. (so well known in his later years in the Free Assembly), and Mr. Mure Macredie of Perceton, both of whom, by their genial presence and fellowship, helped to make our social meeting afterwards (as Mr. Hamilton testifies), "by far the happiest evening we had ever spent," in a Presbyterial capacity.

Though we thus " came out" in one sense, in another we staid in." We not only kept possession of the building in which we met, and of the book in which our proceedings were being recorded; we also kept our several churches,* and if we had had manses, would have kept them too, our experience in this respect widely differing from that of our dear brethren elsewhere, -the trial in our case, scarcely a trial at all. Not indeed, in some cases, was this accomplished without difficulty, arising from obsolete, inconvenient title-deeds and threatenings of ejectment founded thereon; but ultimately there wasn't a member of the Presbytery (as now constituted), who, besides retaining his people, did not succeed in retaining, or rescuing his place of worship also, with whatever of "possessions or goods" might belong to it! The securest of all our churches was the oldest," the Scots' Church, London Wall." Fortunately for the peace of mind of its minister and congregation, it had a constitution, which, if the quoad sacra churches across the border had been equally fortunate and far-seeing, would probably have saved them, as it saved it, from the hand of the spoiler; being bound only to the "Westminster Confession of Faith," and "the form of worship commonly practised in the Church of Scotland!"

Numerically, no doubt, we suffered by the aforesaid secession. Three of the London congregations, with their ministers, left us; but what we lost in one direction, we gained in another. Our separation from them brought us into fellowship with all the Evangelical Churches around, from which we had in a great ineasure been excluded before. We were isolated no longer.

* It should, however, be mentioned that in the Provinces several churches were seized after much litigation-e.g., Dr. Munro's at Manchester.

Though we had always been "Nonconformists" in fact, we were not regarded as such (except by the Establishment), so that our position between the two great parties of "Church and Dissent," was alike anomalous and difficult. We were disowned equally by both, and we were not strong enough to stand, or at least, to make ourselves visible as a denomination, alone.

The Disruption changed all that. We became a denomination, and instead of being stationary or stereotyped as hitherto, we began forthwith to multiply and grow-to break forth on the right hand and on the left. The six or seven charges which constituted the whole Presbytery, in 1843, (along with a similarly small number belonging to the "United Presbyterian Church," afterwards happily amalgamated with them), have now grown into upwards of seventy-twice as large a body as was the entire Synod in England up to that time.

Having neither church nor manse-buildings to look after, immediately, for ourselves, we were all the better situated for taking part in the great movement in that direction, which, by this time, had begun to stir all Scotland. We were ready to welcome the General Assembly's deputies when they came to us; to work with them, or to work for them. And there were not a few of us who did.

The first of those deputies were Dr. Henry Grey, Dr. Cunningham, and Dr. Guthrie; and their first meeting was held in the church at London Wall, as a sort of feeler, or pioneer to the great meeting, announced for the day following, in Exeter Hall,—its proximity to Lombard Street and the Bank of England being (as Dr. Guthrie jocularly remarked), one of its recommendations. Mr. Patrick Maxwell Stewart, M.P. for Renfrewshire, presided at the former, and the Marquis of Breadalbane at the latter. Both meetings were successful, to a wish; and those three distinguished men never appeared to more advantage, or spoke with better effect, than they did on both occasions. The enthusiasm evoked was wonderful,-scarcely less, or less unmistakable, than that of similar gatherings in Scotland;-"liberal things" were both devised and done (several large, surprisingly large, contributions being intimated in course of the proceedings); and such was the demand for the services of the Deputies in