•*>,

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

IS|2£ 12.5

IIP "^" H^H

2.0

11125 ill 1.4

i.6

'is

Photograpliic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

T«chnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa

Tha inatituta hsa attamptad to obtain tha baat
original copy availabia for fiim^ng- Faatur«9 of thia
copy which may ba bibiiographicaliy uniqua,
which may altar any of tha imagas in tha
raproduction, or which may aignificantly ohanga
tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chaclcad baiow.

[T7 Colourad covars/
ULl Couvartura da couiaur

I I Covars damagad/

Couvartura andommag^ia

Covars raatorad and/or laminatad/
Couvartu a rastaurte et/ou iiallicul6a

□ Covar titSa missing/
Lo titra da couvanure manqua

□ Colourad maps/
Cartas g6ographiquas en couiaur

□ Col(
Enc

□

Colourad ink (i.a. othar than blua or black)/
re da couiaur (i.a. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with Other material/
Reli6 avec d'autras documents

□ Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serrie peut causer de i'ombre ou de la
distortion la long de la marge intirieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
Sjipear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been emitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages bianchas ajoutAes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans la taxte,
mais. lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas AtA filmies.

Additional comments:/
Commentairen supplAmentaiies;

L'Inatitut a microfilm* le meilleur exempiaire
qu'il lui a 6t4 poaaibia da aa procurer. Lea details
da cet exempiaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue biblicgraphiqua, qui peuvent modifier
une image reprodulte, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dana la mAthoda normale de filmaga
aont indiqute ci-daaitous.

□ Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

□ P«jes damaged/
Pages endommagtea

I — ~| Pages ""estored and/or laminated/

Pages restaurtes et/ou pelllculAes

I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
J Pages dAcolor»»es, tachattoc ou piquies

I j Pages detached/

Pages dituch^es

Showthrough/
jTrcnsparance

Quality of prir

QuatitA InAgale de rimpressicn

IncSudes supplementary mateclt
Comprend du material supplimentaire

Only edition available/
Seul«i Adilion diaponibii

rT7| Showthrough/

I I Quality of print varies/

I 1 IncSudes supplementary mateclal/

I — I Only edition available/

Th
to

Th
po
of
fill

Or
be
th«
sio
oti
fin
sio
or

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible Image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un tauillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t4 filmtes A nouveau de fa9on A
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous.

Th
shi
Tit
wr

Mi
dif
en^
bei
rig
rec
mc

10X

14X

18X

22X

28X

30X

i2X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thank*
to the generosity off:

Harold Campbell Vaughan Mamorial Library
Acadia University

L'exempiaire filmi ffut reproduit grAce A la
g4n6roi itA de:

Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library

Acadia University

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract «peciffications.

Les images su'vantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec )«
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la netteti de rexemplaire filmA. et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
ffilmage.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or iilustrated impression.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim^e sont filmAs en commen9ant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sonic filmte en commenpant par la
premiere page qui comports une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la derntsre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shalii contain the symbol — »> (meaning "CON-
TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le iymbole ^^^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le
synbole V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different r.iduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. TSe following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les ca.tes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre
filmAs A des taux de reduction diffArents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seul ciichA, 11 est fiimA A partir
de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en has, dn prenant le nonibre
d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mAthode.

•i ;■

■ \ r '

• )

i \

THE BRITISH ELECTIfE FRANCHISE:

OK,

.■'.1

Why Reformed Presbyterians

DO NOT VOTE AT POLITICAL ELECTIONS. "^ 1

. V .• A-

A D'ISCOURSE

.' :t

Rev. J. R. Lawson,

■t- •

SEOoasriD EiDiTionsr.

'-,.f

Published by the authority of The Eefonued Presbytery of Few Brunswick

and Nova ^cotia.

/'■ i

>!,'

'.1

^ V\

"/ speaA; as to wise men; judge ye what I say" — 1 Cor. x: 15.

>'. (

'>c H

■' 1 . ".^;- ,.> ■ , ST. JOHN, N, B.: ;.v. - ..V'- ' ^

TELEGRAPH STEAM BOOK ANIV JOB PRINT, CANTERBURY STREET.

., .- .'■. ■■ 1884. ',, . . ■ . -;^ . .-:.'

..-,<.'

7 ^ \

7Vh

> ft.

¥>

:'i?

V ■

1 ^-^

'*,

»*jr

.•. 1, V

/•■*

^ (

■)

■> - I

.\v ^ i

* I

J > /

l< II fil 'V

T1 f K 1

■.,r

■•■!^.-:l- ■

,v ',

. <". ;.

,..!&■■

■/i^fc

:.A''

.;J .-. ? >

•1^'^V-

/ ■,>■■'.:

-i XH':\

n'^u"

J,-- ' . -J -,

A.WWIS-'"'

■V.

V?T<.>

;-'.-';,^ ■'.;-•■ S--

■*'■'■■ ■>;

^^*>t

'^ ,

•/ ':''■"

'X,,

'■,..<:*.■ : -v%i.

'if I ...

rii :'i' ''"i'

'■ -.-'X'.

•'%;t^.>'

.V.1

f-.''

", .i'i' -' V '

. /^ 1 ..' ■■■,

1-3 ^ V

'].'■':- ' •'

^ ■

r^i-ft;.-^

'/,^;'-./;.i..

i ; .

■^'■/v{,y

■■■ilipp

V'V >! '!?'!*[, iW i iiin i m i I

THE BRITISH ELECTIVE FRANCHISE :

— WmI

OX(,

-f?

Why Reformed Presbyterians

DO NOT VOTE AT POLITICAL ELECTIONS,

A DISCOURSE

Rev. J. R. Lawson.

SEOOISriD EIDITIOnST-

Pablished by the authority of The Eeformed Presbytery of New Brunswick

and Nova Scotia.

"/ speak as to wise men; judge ye what I sayT — 1 Cor. x: 15.

ST. JOHN, N. B.:

TELEGRAPH STEAM BOOK AND JOB PRINT, CANTERBURY STREET.

1884.

** «.:

DISCOURSE.

"I apeak as to wise men; Judge ye what I aay."—l Cob. x: 15.

The right of private judgment is one of the great principles
of Protestantism. Romanism withholds that right from its
votaries. It makes the demand on every one that he surrender
his understanding, will and conscience to the priesthood, who
claim to think for him, to believe for him and direct him in all
his spiritual movements, as a machine is directed.

How different is true Protestantism ! It concedes the rijjht
to every man, to think for himself, to judge for himself, to
decide for himself. Nay more, it makes the demand on every
man, that he exercise that right, that he will not receive his
creed, or his rule of life, from any man, or any body of men,
but from God speaking in his word. It makes the imperative
demand upon him, that he study that word, compare doctrines
and rules of life wiih it, and receive or reject, according to his
convictions as to their agreement or disagreement with that
infallible rule of faith and practice.

In this discourse I propose to discuss a subject of great practi-
cal moment: and my request is that you will lay aside all preju-
dice, and every consideration that would tend to hinder the right
perception of truth, and that you will compare what I have to
say with the great principles of the Bible, and the teachings of
enlightened reason. " To the law and to the testimony; if they
speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light
in them." " I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say."

That there should be any people who have conscientious
scruples to exercise the British Elective Franchise, in the
present condition of the political society, is by many considered
a strange thing. Reformed Presbyterians are a people " won-
dered at," and a " sect every where spoken against," becausie
they assume a position of political dissent, and voluntarily

4 04*^^

A DISCOURSE.

deprive themselves of those rights and privileges which others
enjoy. Their position is strange to many, because the reasons
are not rightly apprehended, and duly considered. Now, in
the sequel of this discourse, I propose to state, as plainly as I
can, some of the more prominent reasons why we, Reformed
Presbyterians, have not voted at political elections in the past,
and why we cannot do so in the future, until some very impor-
tant changes shall have taken place in the constitution and
administration of national affairs.

I. — Preliminary Remarks.

Our declining the Franchise is not because we consider
voting at political elections to he wrong in itself.

Civil government is an ordinance of God. It is His will, aa
well as a dictate of reason, that there be rulers in every land.
It is the right of the people to choose their owr rulers. Every
man, therefore, should vote, if he can do so in a scriptural way.
For any one to decline voting, without a very important reason,
is sinful. There is only one thing that can ever justify a
person in declining to vote — it is the deep conviction on iiis
mind, that there are certain circumstances connected with the
case, which would make it morally wrong for him to do tha;i
which, in other circumstances, he ought *to do, and which it
would be sinful in him to omit.

2. — Our declining to vote is not owing to any want of interest
in political affairs.

He is not a Christian who is not a patriot. Every one ought
to love his country. Public interests ought to lie nearer his
heart than his own private aflfairs. He ought to pray for hi»
country's welfare. He ought to desire to see good men in
office, good laws administered, and that "righteousness" set
up, which the Bible declares, " exalteth a nation." Every one
ought to be willing to bear his due part of the financial burdens
of his country, and, if need be, to shed his blood in its defence.
And it may be safely affirmed, that those who conscientiously
decline the exercise of the Elective Franchise, in the present
condition of things, are not less patriotic thjan others are. They

A DISCOUBSE. 7

are as ready with their taxes, and give as little trouble to tho
mr gistrates and police, as those that claim to be peculiarly
loyal. They belong to no secret revolutionarj society. No
disturber of the peace, known to be such, would be received
into our communion. If we desire changes in the administra-
tion of national affairs, they are such as would strengthen our
country, and not weaken it. The only weapons we use in our
warfare against national evils are Scripture, enlightened reason
and prayer. Our only aim is the establishment of that right-
eousness which " exalteth a nation, ' and the removal of that
sin which is " a reproach to any people."

3. — Our declining to vote is not because it is a matter of in-
difference to us whether good or had men are advanad to
office.

We are not unconcerned as to what is to be the result of any
particular election. It is not a matter of indifference to us
whether a Christian or an infidel, a Protestant or a Pt^ist.a sober
man or a drunkprd, goes into otSce. We would like to see good
men in the magistracy — men such as would be a terror
to evil doers, and a praise to them that do well. We w^uld
like to see good men in Parliament — men possessing such
qualifications as the Bible prescribes, " able men, men of truth,
men fearing God and hating covetousness." And when men of
that character offer their services, it grieves us that the condition
on which we are allowed to vote will not permit us to go
forward and help them into office, and help to keep out those
of an opposite character, of whom the Divine word speaks :
"The wicked walk on every side when the vilest men are
exalted."

4. — Our declining to vote is not owing to any secular advan-
tage that we hope to reap from our position.

It will not be denied that, in this age of selfishness,
when almost every cause is looked at from the standpoint of
worldly interest, it is something for us to be able to say that,
in the position we take in relation to national affairs, we are

not seeking our own things.

It is something for us to be able to

A DISCOURSE.

say that it is not social position or pecuniary gain, that we have
an ey3 to ?n the stand we take. The Covenanting professioi» is
entirely the wrong road to wealth or to worldly honour. We
have no worldly advantages to gain by our profession. We
have very much to lose. What fools then we would be to take
a position of political isolation — a position that exposes us to
much reproach — that hinders the growth of our church numeri-
cally — that stands in the way of our attaining political honoui-s
and influence — if we had not reasons of the weightiest kind [
To these reasons I would invite your earnest attention. " I
speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.'"

II. — General Principi^es.

In determining the line of duty in relation to the exercise
of the Elective Franchise, there are some general principles and
facts to be duly considered.

1. — The voter and the elected candidate are one in law.

The latter is the representative of the former. The theory
of representative government is that, as it would be impractic-
able for all the people of a city or county t^ meet together in
one assembly to do their own legislation, they clioose two or
three persons as their representatives, to take their place, to do
their work, to make their laws for them ; and the official acts
of these representatives are, in law, the acts of those who choose
them. Now, the very first thing thit the elected candidate
does when he enters parliament is to take a certain oath, called
the Oath of Allegiance. That oith he takes as the representa-
tive of his constituents. He takes it in their name, and hence
it is as much their oath as his.

2. — The oath of allegiance is a pledge of loyalty to the consti-
tution of the realm.

When men form thems elves into a socioty for any purpose,
they adopt certain laws and regulations according to which the
operations of the society are to be conducted. Everyone that
joins the society is supposed to know these regulations, and to
approve of them. These are what is called the constitution of

iiiS,,

A DISCOURSE.

the society. Now, the British nation is a great society, formed
for certain great purposes, and as such, it has its laws and
regulatioxis, on the acknowledgment of which one is entitled ta
membership. These are what is called the British Constitution*
Now, the oath of allegiance is a solemn expression of approval
of that constitution, and a pledge to support it. As the coro-
nation oath, which the sovereign takes on ascending the throne,^
j" a pledge to govern according to the laws and customs of the
realm, so the oath of allegiance is the pledge of the people to
support the sovereign in thus governing. It will thus be seen,
that it is not so much an oath to the sovereign personally, as
to the constitution of which he or she is the head. It is a^i
acknowledgment of those principles and laws which constitute
the rule or standard, according to which all legislation is to be
conducted. The truth is, it is the constitution that governs,
both the sovereign and the j.3ople. They are both, with the
solemnity of an oath, committed to it, and pledged to its support.

3. — The question in regard to the iMwfulneas of exercising the
Elective Franchise hinges entirely on the mo'iul character
of tJie constitution which one is thereby pledged to support*

To swear allegiance to a coiTupt system of civil government,
is an oath which no Christian should take, either personally or
by representation. The members of the Reformed Presbyterian
Church, believing that there are great moral evils in the British
constitution, feel bound to maintain a position of political dis-
sent. They decline to place themselves :n any position for
which they would be required to qualify by a personal ocith
of allegiance, and they cannot take pu.rt in choosing representa-
tives who would have to qualify for office, by an oath, in their
name, to a political system which they believe to be unscriptural,
unprotestant, and anti-christian. Their reasons shall now be
more fully stated.

III. — Grounds of our Political Dissent.

Before entering on the consideration of these grounds of
dissent, it may be desirable, to premise that the position we
take does notarise from any personal disaffection to the sovereign-

A DISCOURSE.

FH.

We love the Queen personally., and desire that she may be happy
in time and eternity. Our objection to the oath of allegiance
has no respect to the character of the Queen personally, but
only to the moral character of the political system of which she
is the head.

Neither does the position we take arise from any disaffection
to our country and its interests. Let our country be invaded
by a foreign foe, or be in danger from internal sedition, if
Covenanters would not be amonorst the first to shed their blood
in its defence, they would belie their past history. There was
a time when the Covenanters of Scotland raised among them-
selves a whole regiment of soldiers for their country's service.
It was cplled the " Cameronian regiment." '^he distinguished
Free Church historian, Hetherington, thus writes, " The generous
Covenanters stood forward in defence of their native land, and
offered to raise a regiment for public service, stipulating only
that the officers should be men of conscience,honour and fidelity:,
and unstained by the persecuting proceedings of the late reign,
and that their service should be for the defence of the nation,
and the preservation of religion against Popery, prelacy and
tyranny. These terms were gladly accepted, and in one day,
without beat of drum, or the expenditure of levy money, they
raised a regiment of eight hundred men, commonly termed the
* Cameronian legiment.' Such indeed was their loyalty and
zeal, that they even offered to raiso two more regiments, if
their services should be required, for the protection of their
country's liberties. Sufficient that they were neither the nar-
row minded fanatics, nor the miserable handful, which theit
enemies and persecutors pretended ; but in reality, a powerful
body of high hearted and patriotic men." It is also the testi-
mony of the most reliable historians, that to the Covenanters
of Scotland the c use of civil and religious liberty in Britain is
more indebted t an any other party in the State. We claim
to be patriots in the truest and best sense. There is not a drop
of Fenian blood in a Covenanter's veins. The principles we
hold, if generally adopted and acted on, would be the life, the
strength, the glory of our country.

Neither does our objection to the oath of allegiance arisd

A DISCOURSE.

from any opposition to the laws that relate to civil things ; all
these laws, so far as I know, are just and right. In no nation
under the sun is there better secunty for life and property.
Our objection to the oath of allegiance has "-hiefly a respect to
the constitution in its religious aspect. By taking that oath,
we would solemnly pledge ourselves to support what we con-
sider to be great moral evils. And as we are not allowed to
vote on any other condition than that of swearing to support
what we believe to be morally wrong, we must forego what we
would in other circumstances regard as a privilege and a duty ;
at the same time, endeavouring to live " quiet and peaceful
lives in all godliness and honesty," and waiting in faith and
humble prayer, for that promised good time, when all the evils
that afflict society, shall be done away, and great voices shall be
heard in Heaven proclaiming : " The kingdoms of this world are
become the kingdoms of our Lord and oi his Christ."

1. — We cannot acknowledge the constitution, or swear to sup-
port it, because, as professing Christians, we have swoi^n
allegiance to Christ our King.
A Christian is one who has, if not verbally yet mentally and
heartily, taken on oath of unqualified allegiance to the Lord
Jesus Christ, the Enthroned Redeemer. "The Iiord is our
judge, the Lord is our law-giver, the Lord is our king," is the
hearty confession of the redeemed in every country and age.
He who bought them with his blood is the " King of saints."
How then, can they swear allegiance to any thing that is in
opposition to Christ, or that is a usurpation of his Crown and
Dignity ? The British oath of allegiance is an acknowledg-
ment of every prerogative which the sovereign assumes. The
constHutional prerogative of the Crown is twofold, head of the
State, and also head of the National Church, or in other words,
supreme in all causes civil and ecclesiastical. The oath of allegi-
ance is an acknowledgment of both. It is a pledge to support

the Royal Supremacy over the National Church, as well as over
the State. If it were only an acknowledgment of the supre-
macy in civil things, there is no one in our fellowship who
would object to it, at least so far as the present sovereign is
concerned. She has a legitimate claim,to the cordial allegiance

A DISCOUKSE.

of all her subjects, as head of the State, and long may she live,
to be such ! Bat the Constitution of the realm assigns her the
headship over the National Church also ; thus making her
supreme in all causes relating to its doctrines, worship, dis-
cipline and government. The final court of appeal on all
questions ecclesiastical, is the Queen in council. Such a
claim we dare not sanction. The Lord Jesus Christ is
the sole Head of the Church which He pu'"^hased with his own
blood. He is so by the appointment of God the Father who
set him " King on his holy hill of Zion." The Redeemer never
appointed any one either in earth or in heaven to represent him
in that office. In all spiritual things, the Church is accountable
to no one but Christ speaking in his word ; and for any human
being to claim supremacy over the Church in general, gr any
section of the Church in particular, is an invasion of the
sovereign prerogative of Him who is " the Head of His body
the Church, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all." To take
the oath of allegiance therefore, in its present form, would be
swearing to support that which is a usurpation of the preroga-
tive of Christ. It would be swearing to support a fallible,
mortal creature in wearing that crown that ought to be on no
head but that of God's Anointed. " This is the Magistracy,"
said the dying martyr, Cargill, " that I have rejected, that
which is invested with Christ's power. Seeing that power taken
from Christ which is his glory, and made the essential of an
earthly crown, seemed to mo as if one were wearing my hus-
band's garments after he had killed him." How could we
pledge ourselves, with the solemnity of an oath, to support
such an authority as that, and be true to Him who is " the
head of all principality and power," the sole " head of his body
the Cnurch," and " in whom it hath pleased the Father that all
fullness shall dwells'

2. — We could not acknowledge the Constitution or swear to sup-
port it, because we are Presbyterians.

It is not necessary here to enter upon an examinatio of the
relative merits of Presbyterianism and Prelacy. Let it suffice
to say that these two, systems are diverse in their nature,

A DISCOURSE.

operation and effects. They are diametrically opposed to each
other. They cannot, then, both be right. If Prelacy be right,
Presbyterianism is wrong. If Presbyterianism be right, Pre-
lacy must be wrong. To think of acknowledging both systems
is absurd. Well, how does the case stand under the British
Constitution ? Prelacy is the religion of the State. It is
established by law. The British nation once abolished that
system and established Presbyterianism. The National Cove-
nant of Scotland and the Solemn League and Covenant of Eng-
land, Ir^iiland and Scotland were sworn and subscribed by King
and Parliament, and by all ranks of the people, with the special
view of checking the advances of the Prelatic system, and of
promoting the Presbyterian Reformation. In the days of
Charles the Second these Covenants were cancelled. An act
was passed, declaring null and void all the national deeds of
former years in favour of Presbyterianism. The . Covenants
that had been nationally sworn to and subscribed, and ratified
again and agaiR by Act of Parliament, were cast away as un-
lawful transactions. Prelacy was again set up. The sovereign
in the coronation oath, and the people in the oath of allegiance,
swear to support it as the established religion. The Act of
Parliament by which Presbyterianism was nationally set aside, is
still unrepealed. Now the question comes up, how could we>
as honest Presbyterians, give our consent to such an Act as
that ? If we believe that Presbyterianism is a scriptural
system, how could we swear to support that national act, still
on the Statute Book, that abolished it — that declared all
legislative acts passed in favour of it to be null and void — that
condemned all the National Covenants entered into on its
behalf, as treasonable transactions ? If we believe that Prelacy
is an unscriptural system of ecclesiastical policy, how could we
swear to maintain it ? For a Presbyterian to take the oath of
allegiance in the present condition of things, or to send another
to take it for him, is to compromise his Presbyterianism, and
to enter into a confederacy with Prelacy. He abandons the
great principle of Presbyterianism, the exclusive headship of
the Redeemer over the Church, by swearing allegiance to a
political system that invests the sovereign with that headship.

14
3.-

A DISCOURSE.

We could not acknowledge the constitution or swear to
support it, because we are Protestants.

It is an undoubted fact that, in the present day, Britain, as
a nation, is in league with anti-Christ. That supremacy over
the national Church which belongs to the sovereign, is one of
the great essential principles of the anti-christian system. Be-
fore the Reformation in England, that supremacy was claimed
by the Pope of Rome. Henry the VIII, abolished the Papal
power in England. He stripped the pretended occupant of St.
Peter's chair of his jurisdiction over the English Church. But
what did he do with it ? Did he restore it to " the Blessed and
only Potentate " to whom it exclusively belonged ? No. He
took it to himself, as sovereign of the state, and ever since, it
has been an element in the prerogative of the British sovereign,
whether male or female. The oath of allegiance is, therefore,
a pledge to support a supremacy, in things pertaining to the
church, not less anti-christian than that formerly claimed by
the Pope of Rome.

And then, to what a melancholy extent, legislation has been
going on during the last few years, in favour of Romanism !
Hundreds of thousands of pounds out of the national treasury
are annually expended in the interests of " the man of sin."
There is scarcely a session of Parliament that is not marked by
some fresh concession to " the mystery of iniquity." England
Is getting rapidly to be Romish, in its Parliament, its church,
its laws ; and if the Romeward tendency continues much longer,
a Romish king may sit upon England's throne.

In view of all these ruinous concessions, what is it that
consistency requires of all true Protestants ? Is it not to pro-
test against them ? A Protestant is one that protests ; that
protests against Romanism, and every thing that promotes its
interest. But, how can one protest against Romish idolatry,
who gives his sanction to a political system that supports it ?
What is the man's protest worth, who, one day, in the pulpit
or on the platform, lifts up his voice against Romanism, and
on the next day, swears that he will support a society that is
in league with it, a Parliament that upholds it, and laws that
were framed for the purpose of conciliating it, and that are

A DISCOURSE.

operating effectually for its advancement? Ye^ that is the
very position of the great body of so called Protestants. Minis-
ters faithfully denounce Rome in the pulpit and on the platform.
Protestant leagues are formed to resist its aggi-essions. Yet
these very people, ministers and others, will glory in iheit
connection with a political system that is helping forw^d the
interests of that " man of sin," that God will consume with the
spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his
coming."

What is such a protest worth ? Will God ever honour it to
weaken the power of Rome ? Such a protest has been going
on for many years. Yet, what has it accomplished ? Nothing.
The Church r 2 Rome is growing in numbers and advancing in
political influence, throughout the British dominions. Now,
let Protestants try another plan. Let them take up a consis-
tent position. Let them say to "the higher powers" that \t6
at the head of national affairs: — "We will withdraw our
a-llegiance from you, unless you withdraw your allegiance from
Rome." Let Protestants generally take up the position which
the small body of Reformed Presbyterians has taken, but
without any political influence because so small, and in a shoii;
time their influence will be felt. The throne and cabinet and
parliament will soon feel the povre/r of their practical protest.
National concessions to Rome will soon cease, and England
will become what she ought to be, a truly Protestant nation.
^' I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say."

4. — We cannot acknoivledge the constitution or aivear to support
it, because we are Covenanters.

We assume that designation because of the distinctive grouhd
T7e take in relation to the British Covenants, commonly called
the National Covenant of Scotland, and the Solemn League
and Covenant of England, Ireland and Scotland. These Cove-
nant transactions we believe to be still binding on the British
Nation, and will be so until the objects contemplated in them
shall be accomplished. This we believe for the following
reasons: —

First. — They were truly moral aiid scriptural deeds. Thiii

A DISCOURSE.

i ■

will be seen by an unprejudiced comparison of them with the
great principles of the Bible. In regard to the Solemn League,
the impartial Free Church historian, Hetherington, declares
that " it was the wisest, the sublimest, and most sacred docu-
ment ever framed by uninspired men, ♦ ♦ * the noblest
in its Essential nature and principles of all that are recorded
among the international transactions of the world." If it can
be demonstrated, as most assuredly it can, that the pledges of
these Covenants are based on the pure and indestructible
principles of the word of God, it follows that they must remain
in full force, unaffected by lapse of time, and undisturbed by
any subsequent legislation, designed to render them null and
void.

Second. — They were truly national deeds. They were not
the transactic ns of a party in the nation, but were as truly
national as any that ever occupied a place on the Statute book
of the realm. The Scottish Covenant was the deed oP the
nation, hence called the National Covenant. The Solemn
Le gue was first taken by the Lords and Commons, legally
assembled in Parliament, then by the generality of the people
of England. It was sworn and subscribed by Charles II, on his
ascending the throne, and was placed on the Statute book, as
British law throughout all future time.

Third. — The ends contemplated in these Covenants have not
yet been accomplished. It is one of the common objections to
the present obligation of these national deeds that, " whilst they
were very necessary and useful in their day, they have served
the purpose for which they were intended, and are now no
longer needed." No assertion could be more contrary to facts.
The British Covenants are as much needed now as they were
in the day that gavd ihem birth. The same evils against which
they were intended to be a national testimony still exist.
Therefore, Covenants that aimed at their removal, are no less
needed in the nineteenth than in the seventeenth century.

Now, let these three facts be duly considered by any intelli-
gent, unprejudiced person, viz: that the Covenants referred to
were Scriptural in their nature — that they were truly national
deeds — that the objects contemplated in them have not yet

A DISCOURSE.

been accomplished ; let him study the whole subjecf: in the light
of the p;reat principles of the Bible, touching Covenanting and
Covenant obligation ; let him study God's past dealings with
nations and churches for breach of their fathers* vows, and he
will find the conclusion irresistible, that the British Covenants
are still binding morally on the British nation, and will be so
until the great and glorious objects aimed at shall be accom-
plished.

B.ut what is the present attitude of Britain in relation to
these national vows ? It i . that of national repudiation. A.
very few years after they became law, they were effaced from
the Statute book. On the restoration of Charles II, an act
was passed by the legislature, declaring these Covenant deeds
null and void, and without any legal force in any part of the
realm. They were even branded as treasonable documents^
and ordered to be burned by the common hangman. That
act, commonly called the Act Rescissory, is still on the Statute
book. It is a portion of that national constitution which the
sovereign swears to support in the coronation oath, and which
the people swear to support in the oath of allegiance. It is an
act that has involved the nation in the guilt of national perjury,
by repudiating solemn engagements sealed by an oath with
uplifted hand to God. Can any one swear to support such an
act as that and be guiltless ?

Xo such an act still unrepealed, Reformed Presbyterians
cannot give their consent, either personally or by representa-
tion. For nearly two hundred years our church has occupied
the position of dissent from the British constitution. We
have never sought to conceal that position. We have never
been ashamed of it. Our testimony is before the church and
the world. We have earned a large measure of reproach by
our attitude of political isolation. We are sometimes accused of
hair-splitting, magnifying trifles, being righteous over much,
etc., by adopting a position of such singularity. It is generally
considered that the moral issues involved in our political dissent
are not of sufficient value to warrant the sacrifice of such
political privileges as others enjoy. To all such reproaches we
reply in the language of the son of Jesse to his elder brother

A DISCOURSE.

Eliab, when taunted with impertinence and self-conceit in
proposing to fight the vaunting Philistine of Gath : " Is there
not a cause ? " If Britain has vilely cast away her Covenants
with her God — if she has the guilt of national apostacy and
national perjury resting upon her — if she has set up and estab-
lished systems solemnly abjured in these Covenants, and has
shed the blood of thousands for no other crime than that of
adhering to them — if the constitution of Britain at this day,
in relation to religion, is founded on the entire subversion of
national engagements once entered into, and sealed with an
oath to the Majesty in the Heavens — engagements moral and
scriptural in their nature, and just as needful now as in past
ages — is there not a sufficient cause why we should stand aloof,
lest we should be partakers of the nation's sins ? "I speak as
to wise men ; judge ye what I say."

lY. — Common Objections to our Position Considered.

1. — It is alleged that other people, just as pious and conscienti'
ous as we, vote at political elections. They see nothing
lurong in it.

Now it is freely admitted that many people exercise the
right of suffrage who are just as wise and conscientious as the
most devoted members of the Reformed Presbyterian Church.
That circumstance, however, is no proof that voting, in the
present condition of things, is morally right. Many good men
defended slaverj"^ in the United States, a few years ago, yet
that did not prove slavery to be right. If many wise and con-
scientious men use the Franchise, may it not be because they
have not duly considered what is involved in it ? Worldly
interest, too, tends to dim the perception of even good men.

" When self the wavering balance holds,
'Tis rarely right adjusted."

2 — It is objected that if all were like Reformed Presbyterians,
then there would be none to vote: there could be no
government and anarchy luould be the result

Now, in reply to this objection, it would be enough to say
that, in determining our line of moral action in any case, we

A DISCOURSE.

have nothing to do with any supposed consequences. Obedience
is ours ; results are God's. We are responsible for our duty ;
God is responsible for tlio consequences.

But is it really so, that, if the whole or a large body of the
community were to adopt and act on these principles, there
would be none to vote, and consequently no government ?
Most certainly it would not be so. The very opposite would
speedily be the result. If the whole community were to adopt
our views and practically apply them, the national evils of
which we complain would soon be constitutionally removed,
and then all would vote, because they could do so in a scriptural
way. If even a considorable portion of the people throughout
the realm were to unite with us in our political dissent, we
would have an influence that would be felt in the councils of
the nation. Our voice would be heard in high places. Peti-
tions from two or three millions of people, setting forth the
great national evils, and respectfully, but earnestly asking a
repeal of them, would be listened to. The remonstrance would
be felt. As the petitioners would grow in numbers, they would
advanci in influence. Thus, in a short time, through the grow-
ing power of the public opinion, great and glorious changes
would be effected. The government would be established on
a scriptural basis. Then we would all vote. We would feel it
to be our duty and privilege to do so, because we could exercise
that right without yielding ourselves to sinful conditions. Such
changes will be effected, and in the way to which I have
adverted. It will be by men having their eyes opened to see
the national evils, and earnestly t\nd unceasingly protesting
against them. As the number of: such shall increase — and
increase it will, when God's time for enlargement shall come—
their influence shall be more and more felt. Evils of long
standing shall melt away before a wholesome and growing
public opinion. The institutions of the country shall be
thoroughly Christianized, and then, those who now sorrowfully
feel it to be their duty to stand aloof, lest they should be par-
takers of the nation's sins, will be amongst the first to pledge
their allegiance, and amongst the first at the polls.

A DISCOUBSE.

^. — It is objected that if all Protestants were to keep aivay Jrom
the polls, Papists would get into poiver, and. the whole
fabric of our Protestant institutions and liberties would
soon be completely demolished.

Well, even if they should gat into power, as the result of a
general adoption of our position, would that feared result
justify us in doing evil to prevent it? We are not in any case
to "do evil that good may come "

But what have the elections done in the past to keep Papists
out of power ? Protestants have been voting almost universally
for many years, and yet Romanism has been advancing in
political influence. In England, Popei-y is rising to still higher
power. In Scotland, the land shadowed by martyrs' monu-
ments, where all classes of Protestants vote, with the exception
of a few Reformed Presbyterians, Romanism is still advancing
to higher power. In our Dominion where almost universal
surfrage is the rule, Papists are still advancing higher and
higher in the scale of political influence. The polls, as at
present constituted, have no power against Rome. H<fw could
they ? Here is a candidate for Parliament. He is considered
a staunch Protestant. Listen to all his speeches. Mark all his
votes. Measure his influence, and in the majority of instances.
Protestantism is a loser by him and not a gainer. What is the
reason of this? Look at that man on his entrance into the
Legislature. What is the pledge that he takes at the very
threshold of his political career? The very first thing he does
is to take an oath, by which he is committed to a legislation
that, in many important particulars, is favourable to Rome's
pretensions. He commits himself to a political system that is
in league with it. He swears allegiance to a constitution of
government that, in its most essential particular, is Romish,
viz: the anti-christian supremacy over the national Church that
is vested in the Crown. He swears to support laws framed
for the very purpose of conciliating " the man of sin," and that
Are most effectually promoting its interests.

After having taken such a pledge as that, with what con-
sistency can he set himself, like an honest man, to resist
Romish aggressions ? All the influence he exerts against a

A DISCOURSE.

measure favourable to Romish pretensions is out of lino with
his initiatory pledge. Such a man must go through Parliament
hampered by the consciousness that his original oath and all
subsequent legislative efforts in antagonism to Romish interests
do not lie in the same plane, or tend in the same direction.
What is that man's Protestant, influence in the Legislature
worth ? Romanism is more likely to be a gainer by him than
a loser. And just so long as men enter Parliament, pledged by
oath to support a politi(*al system that is helping on the
interests of " the man of sin," all their speeches and votes and
influence will have no more power against thft anti-christian
system than balls of wax would have against the fortress of
Gibraltar.

4. — It is again sometimes said to us : — " Why do yow not vote
to send good men to PavUanunt, that they may help to
rectify these evils of luhich you confijAain 1 You are always
testifying against national evils, and yet you are taking
no practical steps to have them, rectified*'

Such a mode of reasoning looks plausible, but when weighed
in the balance of Scripture and right reason, it will be found
wanting.^ Be it so, that there is a good man who offers his
services, one, who in his place in Parliament, would seek a
thorough moral reformation in national affairs, what would be
the position that we would ourselves assume by voting for such
a man as our representative ? We would just send him to do
that for us, which we would not do ourselves. We would send
him to swear an oath for us that we would not swear person-
ally. We would send him to qualify himself for his Parlia-
mentary career, by swearing allegiance to that which we believe
to be morally wrong. Such would be our position.

Then look at the position in which we would place our repre-
sentative, and in which he would voluntarily place himself.
I affirm that it would be a most Jesuitical one. He would sweat
to support great moral evils, purposing that, after he has done
so, he will set himself to seek their removal. He would swear
to support them to-day that he may get into a position for
seeking their repeal to-morrow. Such would be the position

A DISCOURSE.

of our honourable representative. He would adopt as his rule-
of political action, the principle of Jesuitism, "The end justi-
fies the means." The best friend to our cause in the community
we would not send on such a commission. Even if we were
assured that all the changes we desire would be accomplished
through the Parliamentary influence of such a man, we daro
not assume the responsibility of putting him into a position
that would involve such a sacrifice of honest principle. Even
the assurance that a national milleaium would break forth a»
the result of his exertions would not justify us in sending him
on sr 3h a Jesuitical commission as to " do evil that good may
Qome."

I have thus considered all the objections to our position that
are worthy of notice. Of course, I can afford to leave unnoticed
the common cry of the more ignorant portion of the com-
munity, that we are " anti-government men," " enemies to the
British throne," " bigoted fanatics, &c." We earnestly solicit,
from friend and foe, the most searching investigation of our
history, our principles, and our aims. There is nothing that is
so hostile to our cause as ignorance and prejudice. There is
nothing that we so ardently desire as prayerful close examina-

on.

" I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say."

" Truth, crushed to earth, will rise again,

The eternal years of God are her's;
,But error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies amid her worshipers."