But

Mr. Strachan, who is Sir John Forbes' factor. He commanded the people to go home. As factor he did this, of course. The people refused, and stayed till the ministers came. As the ministers were approaching, they were met at a little distance from the premises where the meeting was to be held by Mr. Strachan and one or two of his friends, whose object it was, now that the meeting could not be prevented by dispersing the audience, to prevent it by sending the ministers away. They first coaxed, which was proper, and then threatened, which was natural, but the ministers did not go back, but went in. They found between two and three hundred individuals waiting to hear them. hear them they could not. Mr. Strachan, with a large thick stick in his hand, ascended the platform, and began to use all the means he had of making a noise-i.e., to bawl at the pitch of his voice, and strike with his stick as hard as he could. What between the articulate noise from his own head and the inarticulate noise from the head of his stick—the difference between the two being that his head cried, Oh, oh, and the head of his stick cried, Whack, whack—it was impossible for any other voice to be heard than his and his stick's. Three of the members of the deputation went upon the platform and attempted to obtain a hearing, but upon this Mr. Strachan and his stick called in the powerful assistance of Mr. James Crombie, manufacturer, and his stick (if he had one), who is a relative to the family of the minister of the parish (Mr. Crombie, we mean, not his stick), and six other individuals and their sticks, and thus noise was produced sufficient to deafen any voice. An offer was made on the part of the deputation to hear all the men of the party, and we suppose we may say also all the sticks of the party, in regular succession-first, a man and then a stick, then another man and then another stick, till they had all delivered their opinion, upon condition that the members of the deputation should then be heard in turn, and that no man and no stick should interrupt them. This condition the men and the sticks unanimously refused to agree to, and then the men bellowed more beautifully and the sticks beat louder than ever. By this time it was apparent to the members of the deputation that if they remained longer serious consequences were inevitable, owing

to the now excited feelings of many of the parishioners, and therefore the meeting broke up. Mr. Moir and Capt. Shepherd retired into Mr. Knight's dwelling-house, and Messrs. Macdonald and Spence remaining without, and waiting for the chance of an opportunity to address the people. This they partially obtained." *

Even in that district, however, there was one whose appearance made its way to men's hearts amidst all the excitement and hostility which prevailed. Mr. M'Cheyne "accompanied Mr. Alexander, of Kirkcaldy, to visit the districts of Deer and Ellon, districts over which he yearned, for Moderatism had held undisputed sway over them for generations." It was no easy work. During the space of three weeks, he preached and spoke at meetings in four-and-twenty places, sometimes more than once in the same place. On 14th February, he writes: "The weather has been delightful till now, to-day the snow is beginning to drift." On the 24th, he says: "To-day is the first we have rested since leaving home, so that I am almost overcome with fatigue." One who tracked his footsteps a month after his death states that "sympathy with the principles of our suffering Church was awakened in many places; but, above all, a thirst was excited for the pure Word of Life. His eminently holy walk and conversation were specially felt. . . . In one place where a meeting had been intimated the people assembled, resolving to cast stones at him as soon as he should begin to speak, but no sooner had he begun than his manner, his look, his words riveted them all, and they listened with intense earnestness, and before he left the place the people gathered round him, entreating him to stay and preach to them. One man who had cast mud at him was afterwards moved to tears on hearing of his death." +

Such incidents taking place in districts so widely separated

* Witness, 25th January, 1843. Dr. Spence, of Aberdeen, states: "The scene described is one of which I have a most vivid recollection, and is literally true, though described in a burlesque style. . . . Unfortunately, I was the only one of the party who had a white neckcloth, . . . and they directed their fury mainly against me."-In. lit. 22nd Nov., 1875. + Memoir, p. 167.

may give some idea of what was going on all over Scotland, but only those who lived through that time can understand the agitation which shook all classes of society, and the struggles and difficulties in the midst of which the cause of the Church had to be maintained.

VII. CLOSE OF THE STRUGGLE.

It was while men were thus engaged that the answer to the claims of the Church, by the Government and the House of Commons, at last came, and gave a new impulse and direction to the movement. On the 4th of January, Sir James Graham transmitted his celebrated letter, in which the Crown, through its advisers, formally rejected the appeal of the Church, and intimated that Patronage must be maintained in its stringency. The letter was found to contain obvious misrepresentations, such as the allegation that the Claim of the Church. was identical with the claims of Popery. It was mortifying to find Government having recourse to such special pleading; but whatever might be thought on this and other points, the hostility of at least one branch of the Legislature was now decisively declared. All that remained was to appeal to Parliament. An extraordinary meeting of the Commission was called for the 31st of January, when it was resolved to petition the House of Commons, and make one final attempt, even at the eleventh hour, to arrest the catastrophe. Mr. Fox Maule having, accordingly, presented this petition, proceeded, on the 7th of March, to move the House for a committee to examine and report on the grievances complained of. With singular ability Mr. Maule and others who followed pled the cause, Mr. Rutherfurd especially signalising the occasion by a masterly argument founded on the laws and constitution of Scotland. With no less singular unanimity did Sir R. Peel, Sir J. Graham and other opponents evade all these grounds of fact and argument, taking refuge in vague generalities and preconceived. opinions. But the vote was decisive. By a majority of 211 against 76 the Claim of the Church was thrown out, the House

* This seems to have struck impartial observers, even when they did not agree with the Church. The distinguished naturalist, Dr. Johnston, of

refusing even to go through the form of an inquiry. "It is not undeserving of notice that of the 37 Scotch Members who were present at the division, 25 voted for Mr. Maule. It was not simply, therefore, the voice of Scotland's Church, but the voice of her national representatives that was that night overborne in the British Parliament. The fact is one which an impartial posterity will mark and remember." *

Had the statesmen of that day known what they were doing, probably some via media would have been at least attempted, some temporising expedient to hold parties together, as in subsequent decisions connected with the Church of England. But statesmen in authority had not yet been scared by the effect of their own work in dealing with these Church questions. In 1843, they were told that a little firmness was all that was required. It was only the clergy of Scotland who had to be dealt with, and if the great Tory and Whig parties would combine to bring down all the weight of imperial authority, then, though a few of the leaders of the Church-firebrands they were called-might go out, yet the Evangelical party, as a whole, would succumb. All difficulty would be cleared away, and the great question would be settled.

Beyond all doubt, IT WAS SETTLED. On that memorable 7th of March, earnest eyes from all parts of Scotland had been turned towards the House of Commons. "An eventful night, Mr. M'Cheyne wrote, this in the British Parliament. Once more King Jesus stands at an earthly tribunal, and they know Him not." It was even so. Worldly politicians did their work,

Berwick-on-Tweed, one of the most amiable of men, writes to Dr. Landsborough, of Stevenston: "I have read the discussion in the House of Commons on your kirk question, and the result pained me. You have never since been out of my mind, nor can I dissever your name from Stevenston Manse, though I fear you will be cruel enough to separate from it bodily. I will say nothing, but surely you will allow me to weep at such a stern resolve. . . . So far as I can judge, the speech of Mr. Rutherfurd was never answered, and the arguments of Sir James Graham and Sir Robert Peel were rather of what would be expedient were a new law to be made than a reply to the law of the Church, as established by several solemn Acts."-Memoir of Dr. Landsborough, p. 182.

*Ten Years' Conflict, vol. ii. p. 427.