“5. In addition to the many fresh lessons which the events in Switzerland impressively read to us, of the power, faithfulness, and grace of God, and of our corresponding duty, with the blessing of the Spirit, the most important benefits may be expected from the Vaudois movement, at once to the present and unborn generations. A testimony to religious principle and the honour of Christ, is urgently needed in Switzerland. Socialism, infidelity, and even atheism, have apostles, and are openly avowed, and widely embraced by multitudes in the humblest classes of life. The Christian ministry is extensively denounced as mere priestcraft. Popery grows apace, numbering, within the present century, the addition of nearly a third to the inmates of its monasteries and its nunneries.

“Various additional points of interest might be suggested, such as the friendly relationship which subsisted between Scotland and Switzerland of old,—the days when above forty Scottish ministers assembled at St Andrews to go over the Confession of Faith of Zurich, Berne, Schaffhausen, St Gall, the Grisons, and their confederates, Mulhausen and Bienne,' a document which, being reviewed, commanded not only approval, but ‘exceeding commendation of every chapter and sentence' from our Scottish forefathers.

"We conclude with one or two sentences from private letters of the Rev. M. Descombaz of Croisettes, near Lausanne. The heaviest punishment inflicted by the civil power has descended on his head. On the day after the sentence of suspension from ministerial functions for a year had been pronounced, he wrote to the committee of the Free Church of Scotland for foreign correspondence, in these terms. This was prior to the noble movement of the 11th and 12th of November:-' The crisis at which we have arrived is most grave. Attached to the nationalist principle, we shall defend to the last the rights of our Church and the freedom of the ministry, but we cannot allow ourselves to be enslaved. Thanks be to God, many of our brethren (would that I could say all!) are resolved to abandon their places in the church of the government, rather than be unfaithful to our Master. The people in the parishes in general continue indifferent to ecclesiastical affairs, through a fault in the institutions, and will not join us in our withdrawing. The faithful alone will follow us. But we must look to duty before everything. We know that our brethren in Scotland pray for us, that they sympathise with us. Oh, that they would seek still more that the Lord would give us to be united in the truth, and for the glorious cause of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ!'

"Again, addressing an assembly of his ministerial brethren, who acquitted him of censure, the same honoured pastor exclaimed, 'We cannot separate our rank as ministers of the gospel from that of pastors of the National Church-nay, we put the latter below the former. We have received a higher commission than that of the Council of State. What! we, ministers of Jesus Christ, are charged to preach the gospel. Are we not to perform our work as often as we are called thereto ? as often as the Lord gives us opportunity? Ah, gentlemen, it is not we alone that are here on our trial—it is you. It is the ministry of the gospel altogether. It

Evangelical men in Europe, and fixed their views on the Erastian character of their own Establishments. Such was the state of things when, in February last, a revolutionary party obtained the ascendancy in the Canton de Vaud, overturned the old constitution, and established a new Radical Government in its room. The party that had thus gained the predominance soon began to evince their hostility to the Evangelical clergy. In May they passed a law to the effect, that every pastor of the National Reformed Church of the Canton who should preside at any meeting held out of a consecrated place, or at an unconsecrated hour, should be deprived of his salary,-a law which was designed to hinder all meetings for edification, and to put an end to all ministerial intercourse with pastors not connected with the Establishment This law deeply grieved the pastors; 223 signed a memorial against it, and it was said that sixty were about to resign. Two or three months later, an order came from the Council of State, that the pastors shonld read from their pulpits, on Sabbath-day, August 3d, in the course of Divine service, a proclamation in defence of the Revolution of February, and of the subsequent conduct of the Government. Many of the pastors obeyed, but about forty-eight refused to do so. Tried for the resistance they had offered to the mandates of the civil authority by their ecclesiastical superiors, they were acquitted by a very large majority, only two or three voting against them, when the Civil Government, exasperated by their resistance, proceeded to suspend a number of them from the exercise of their ministry, some for a longer, others for a shorter period. This brought matters to a crisis. The pastors felt, that if they submitted, the church must be thenceforward entirely enslaved, and be wholly at the mercy of the civil government; they saw that the time had arrived for a final, a united, and a determined stand, and in a short time 150 ministers and assistant-ministers had resigned their connection with the Established Church.

is the most sacred liberty-religious liberty. It is the gospel of our God. Let men then beware: the highest interest is at stake. You are about to fix the religious destiny of your country-that of your Church; for if the liberty of its ministers be attacked, it is itself assailed.'

"Since receiving the above, a letter has arrived from the same excellent pastor, dated 20th of November, being eight days after giving in his demission, in the course of which he says, 'Besides the seceding party there only remain sixty ecclesiastics, of whom many are incapable of executing the ministry, or are barely orthodox. Thus more than three fourths have broken off their connexion with the state, which prepares to commence a violent persecution. It is about to oppose all free religious services, even those which existed previously to the 11th. In the mean time, the General Assembly of the seceding pastors has nominated a commission of seven members, who, with the addition of laymen, will prepare a plan of organisation for the Free National Church. This is our present position.

We

"The seceding pastors leaving their manses, will remain as much as possible in their respective parishes, and form their flocks independent of the state. This last matter is the most difficult, owing to our flocks being little prepared for this system. Dissent has already carried off the best disposed of the people, and they are not likely to re-attach themselves to us. The future is in the hand of the Lord. do not see it to be our duty (at least that is my opinion) to abandon the country. There is more need than ever for all the zeal and devotedness of the faithful pastors. If our Master indicates that he calls me elsewhere, I shall go with joy. For the present it is most important to re-establish the Church on a different foundation. The days of the 11th and 12th will be ever memorable. The Lord has powerfully sustained and strengthened his servants. In renouncing the salary of the state, we have reacquired the liberty of the gospel ministry. The greater number of us can expect daily bread for ourselves and families, only from the faithfulness of our God. I have made with joy the greatest sacrifices which I could make of temporal things. But will the Lord abandon his children? will he not rather supply us with new proofs of his love? The work of release from bondage (affranchisement) is only begun. The struggle goes on most nobly. (La lutte s'engage de plus belle.) Pray then, dear brother, that your brethren of Vaud may hold firm— may be faithful, and that our country may receive a new and abundant outpouring of the Spirit from on high, and that the dry bones may live.'

"PS-Since the above was written, farther accounts have arrived, from which it appears, that the state is greatly embarrassed with the extent of the movementthat it has applied in vain to the probationers to take the vacant places of the pastors-that great provisional powers have been asked by the executive from the grand council, to meet the emergency, and have been granted-that no concessions have been made to the church, but that an effort is making to divide the faithful. Those who are supposed to have been carried away by sympathy, have an opportunity of returning, if signified in forty-eight hours. It appears that the pastors are not to be allowed to delay their separation from their churches, so long as the 15th. Surely these facts call the more loudly for our intercessions.

"In consequence of the full powers given to the executive by the grand council, the demitting pastors are in serious apprehension that they may be prevented by the hand of power from forming a free church at all. In these prospects, one of the number writes, of date 19th November, to British Christians,- Pray for us, brethren, that all this which is done against the glory of God and the advancement of his kingdom, may be overruled to the glory of God and the promotion of the kingdom of Christ. Pray for us, that the spirit of wisdom, peace, strength, decision, love, zeal, may be abundantly shed into the hearts of God's people in our land. Pray for us, that the Prince of Peace may keep us in peace outwardly and inwardly. It is the cause of God, of Christ, of the gospel, of religious liberty, of true morality, of all that is dear and sacred here below, which is artfully, strongly, perseveringly threatened by all these measures. We know who it is that reigneth; but we may have to pass through I know not what. God only knows. Let him only make us and keep us faithful, and all will be well. I commend myself, my brethren in the

ministry, the church in our land, our beloved country itself, to the prayers of our Christian friends in Britain of every denomination. In such times there are no denominations but two,-for God and against God.""

Later than the above we have the following letter from the Rev. M. Scholl of Lausanne to Mr Lorimer.

“Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland, 1st of December. "MY DEAR BROTHER IN THE LORD,-I lose no time in acknowledging, with many thanks, your letter of the 21st November, so full of Christian love, sympathy, and encouragement.

"My chief object in writing so soon is to give you and our Christian friends in Scotland a just idea of what has taken place in the Canton de Vaud respecting the National Church. Your letter shows that you were but imperfectly acquainted with the facts; and many things of importance have taken place since you heard from Mr Merle D'Aubigné, which it is my duty to communicate to you. I suppose I need not revert to the grievance, the oppression under which, in many respects, our National Church has been labouring during the last months,—indeed, ever since the late revolution took place in our once happy country. The last was the sentence of suspension pronounced by the civil power against forty-three ministers and pastors, who had declined reading in the pulpit a political proclamation, or held Divine service out of legal hours and legal churches. The clergy, in very great numbers, met at Lausanne on the 11th and 12th of November, and, after a discussion which lasted nearly two days, 155 decided upon resigning their official situations. But though they sent it on the 13th or 14th, collectively, they declared to Government that it would become effectual only on the 15th of December. This, I fear, was an erroneous step. But they were led to it by several considerations, which were not entirely without foundation. They wished to get the greatest number of names possible; and they got many by this means. They were afraid, if they had sent a resignation to become effectual immediately, the interruption of Divine worship in so many parishes would cause a perturbation in the country that might be very prejudicial to its peace and well-being; and they feared also to be accused of being desirous to produce a political re-action. Finally, many were in hopes that, by giving time to Government before they definitely left their official situations, Government would be induced to retrace its steps, and give guarantees for the liberty of the church and of the ministry. These, I think, were their motives. I am sorry to say the results have been very bad. Government has made the worst use of this delay, by endeavouring to divide the ministers and pastors, and sending them circulars to induce them to remain in the bosom of the Church, excepting from this invitation to remain only a few that had been conspicuous in the late movement, or were otherwise unpopular with them, because too Methodistical in the opinion of our rulers. For instance, I have received no circular calling me back to my parish, because I had not joined the general demission, but given an immediate and absolute one. It is to be noted, at the same time, that Government did not promise in these circulars any guarantees to the church or its ministers. Meanwhile, the Great Council being assembled, they requested, and easily obtained, full powers,—dictatorial powers,—to supersede the ecclesiastical law of 1839, the laws concerning public instruction (for the purpose, it is believed, to ordain, in case of need, schoolmasters), and to act as they shall think fit concerning all religious meetings out of church and church hours (which meetings are very numerous among us, who have no evening service in any church.) This is the power of suspending at will the degree of religious liberty we still possessed.

"These powers being granted, Government sent their circulars to the pastors and ministers mentioned above. The connection of these two measures is too evident to need more than being alluded to. By the circulars, they call them back; by the full powers, they tell them that if they do not return, they will be prevented forming a free church,-religious liberty, to a certain extent, being essential to its formation. "The result of the appeal to Government has been very bad. On Friday, out of the ministers or pastors who had sent in their resignation, thirty-three had retracted it; and I very much fear many more will do it. Some very devoted men are in the

number. They have been led to act in this inconsistent way by various motives. Great attachment to their parishes,-the pressing solicitations of a great number of their parishioners petitioning them for it, and, finally, the full powers granted to Government, which led such ministers to fear that religious liberty being about to be suspended, they would not be able to establish a free church, or even to hold meetings in their parishes for worship. They concluded too hastily from all this, that if they were to persist in the resignation, they would not be able to act as ministers at all. I must also mention, that many who had signed the general demission,* had done it too hastily, from excitation rather than mature conviction of duty; and their hasty, ill-grounded decision failed them in the time of need. Such is the explanation of the painful fact alluded to.

"At the same time I am convinced that by far the greatest number of the resigning ministers will remain firm. Many of them are very poor, and without any means of supporting their large families. With such and many others, it has really been a noble act of faith and conscience, which will not be without its effects.

"Committees have been organising in order to help such ministers who need it, and also to prepare the basis for a free church; but I very much fear it is not to be soon realized. From what I have stated, you must perceive that in all this we are labouring in the most unfavourable state of things. Two circumstances especially make our situation very difficult and unpromising. 1. Religious liberty is suspended on the will of Government, by the full powers granted. It is also dependent in its exercise in great measure upon the will of the worst part of our population, who have even yesterday attacked and interrupted a peaceful meeting of Christians worshipping the Lord. It has been with great difficulty that the rabble, excited by the proclamation of Government against oratoires, and by wine, have been prevented, by part of the congregation and other friends, from entering by force the said place of worship, and ill-treating the congregation. Many blows were given and received. Religious liberty is not written on the constitution. We have against it the Government and the rabble, and for it nothing, except that it had been enjoyed for many years, but is now half lost.

"2. The people in general understand not at all the conduct of the ministers who are gone out. A number of them are strongly prejudiced against them, and full of religious antipathies. All has been done to produce the worst state of feeling. The real flock of Christ is a very small minority lost in the great mass, and many real christians are ignorant of, and prejudiced against, the principle of a Church separated from the state. The Christian people coming with a single eye out of the church of the state, and wishing for a free church, is a minority in the minority. Except at Lausanne and some others, there are hardly any such. I may say that, generally speaking, we are coming out without a people as far as your great principle is concerned, the only and supreme Headship of Christ practically recognised. How different a state of things from that of Scotland in both these important respects! "Believe me, with every wish for every blessing upon your Church, yours affectionately in the Lord, CHS. SCHOLL, Pasteur. “The resigning ministers are, as far as practicable, remaining in their parishes.” EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE.-We intended to have given at length the admirable address sent forth by the Committee appointed by the Liverpool Conference, but it is long, and our space is limited. It is from the pen of our much-loved friend and brother in the Lord, Mr Hamilton of London; and it will be read with heartfelt pleasure by all, even though they may not yet see their way clearly to give in their adherence to this alliance. The closing sentence of the address is one to which all who love the Lord will gladly respond :—“ One of the last resolutions adopted in the Liverpool Conference was, "That as the Christian union which this Conference desires to promote can only be attained through the blessed energy of the Holy Spirit, the Conference unanimously recommends the members present, and absent brethren, to make this matter the subject of simultaneous weekly petition to the throne of grace, in their closets and families; and suggests the forenoon of Monday as the time for

* Amounting, after a few days, to nearly 180 pastors and ministers.

that purpose.' It would be delightful to know that the recommendation of the Conference was completely carried out. The Conference itself was an answer to prayer; and there were few who attended it who did not depart with a deepened conviction of the power of prayer. Since that Conference closed many have been resorting to the throne of grace on this very errand with increased urgency and hopefulness; and as no prayer can be offered more confidently than one which was first offered by the great Intercessor, so nothing could afford a surer earnest that the set time is come than to find that the people of God are continuing with one accord in supplication. With much benefit to themselves, neighbouring congregations might occasionally hold united prayer-meetings for this end; and it has been suggested that Christian Union might be made the subject of special prayer on the first of January 1816."

ECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCE.

DEBATE IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 1777, REGARDING LADY GLENORCHY'S CHAPEL.

In the printed case for the trustees of this chapel, in the action at present pending, there is a narrative of the various proceedings regarding it in the Church Courts. As, however, that is a mere sketch, and as we happen to have in our possession a minute account in manuscript of the whole of that famous debate, we think it as well to give it a place here, both as a valuable and important public document, and also on account of its interest to many of our readers. It is altogether from a private source, and has never before been printed.

The cause came on to be heard in the General Assembly on the 27th May 1777but the great length of the pleadings at the bar prevented the business being farther advanced on that day than hearing the parties themselves, and the discussion was resumed on the day following, the 28th of May 1777, when, after a long and animated debate, the Assembly at last came to a final determination on the case. The form in which it came before the Assembly, was by a complaint against a sentence of the Synod of Lothian and Tweeddale reversing a sentence of the Edinburgh Presbytery, who had appointed Dr Webster, one of their number, to preach at the introduction of a minister into this chapel, and discharging all ministers and probationers within their bounds from officiating in it, and discharging the ministers of this Church from employing any minister of said chapel to officiate for them. On the part of the presbytery, appeared at the bar, the Rev. Dr Johnstone of North Leith, Mr Warden of Canongate, Dr Erskine, Dr Webster, Mr Walker, and Dr M'Queen of Edinburgh. On the part of the synod, the Rev. Mr Robertson of Ratho, Mr Christy of Corstorphine, Mr Robertson of Dalmeny, Dr Grieve of Dalkeith, Dr M'Cormick of Prestonpans, and Dr Carlyle of Inveresk. In the debate on the following day the Rev. D. Hunter of Dumfries, Mr Duff of Tippermuir, Mr Taylor of Paisley, Mr Campbell of Renfrew, Dr Blenshall of Dundee, ministers, and Mr Alexander Belshes, advocate, spoke warmly and strongly against the sentence of the synod, and in defence of the admission of the chapel to church communion. Lord Chief Baron Montgomery took up the same side, though not quite so strongly. On the other hand the Rev. Dr George Hill of St Andrews, Professor John Hill of Edinburgh, Principal Campbell of Aberdeen, and Mr Buchan Hepburn, advocate, zealously vindicated the procedure and sentence of the synod, and urged the propriety of its being confirmed by the General Assembly.

The debate ran into two branches, one relative to the church forms and mode of proceeding had in the cause-the second, and the most important, relative to the merits of the institution itself.

On the first of these points, objections, quoted from the case of the presbytery, were brought forward and insisted on by the different speakers. The reply that