r^Q^ •>t. o> o > ^^..^^ ,*i&l£^^o %/ /J|^\ %^^^^ y^M^^ •% *'•-«*' <^ - ^o^ ^^0 "hi^ o-.* -^o VAo^ vq -k^ ^'-'^^ > ^f. 'K^ *• ..^.^^ov \1 .♦^^.^. ^'^C^l^^l^/. c. (^'^c-l^^^d^ ^ Gi3::R.iSTi^isr XjOit^ltit. A DISCOURSE, PREACHED BEFORE THE SYNOD OF NORTHERN INDIANA AT THE ^OPENING OF ITS SESSIONS, AT INDIANAPOLIS, OCTOBER 10, 1861. I'UBLISHED BY RKQUEST OIT THE SYNOD. BY JOHN M. LOWRIE, D. D FOKT WAYXK, IXI). INDIANAPOLIS: INDIANAPOLIS JOURNAL COMPANY, PRINTERS. 1861. A DIS COURSE, PREACHED BEFORE THE SYNOD OF NORTHERN INDIANA AT THE OPENING OF ITS SESSIONS, AT INDIANAPOLIS, OCTOBER 10, 1861. I»XJBIjISIlEr> BY RKQUEST OF THE SYNOD. BY JOHN M. LOWRIE, D, D, FORT WAYNE, IND. INDIANAPOLIS: INDIANAPOLIS JOURNAL COMPANY, PRINTERS 1861, " The following resolution was unanimously adopted: Resolved^ That the thanks of this Synod be tendered to Rev. Dr. Lowrie for his very able disccurse on Christian Loyalty, and he be requested to furnish a copy for publication." A true extract from the Minutes. E. W. WRIGHT, Stated Glerh CHKISTIAN LOYALTY. Titus, 3: 1. " Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates." These words are addressed by an aged minister of the gospel to a younger. And we, who acknowledge the inspira- tion of the great Apostle to the Gentiles, must admit that ministers of the church of Christ, in all ages, have here, not only words of truth as to the soundness of the doctrine incul- cated, and words appropriate to the ministerial office, as to the exhortation given, but also words authoritative, as to the righteous discharge of ministerial duty. That is to say, the Holy Ghost by the mouth of Paul the aged, commands the ministers of Christ to put their hearers in mind of the duty they owe the civil government under which they are. No man that ever lived had a higher estimate of the sacred character of the gospel ministry than the apostle Paul. If ever a man had a passion for souls, if ever a man thought all other teachings tame in comparison with the spiritual instruc- tions which lead men to the cross, if ever a minister knew truly, the spiritual functions of the church, and the ap- propriate duties of the ministry ; if, in the discharge of any particular duty, any one minister may be a just exam- ple to others ; — all these things we may grant to Paul. And here one, who determined to know nothing among men but Jesus Christ and him crucified, in addressing a younger minister touching ministerial duties, bids him remind the peo- ple of their civil obligations. Considering, then, the topic chosen by the Apostle, and the person to whom he addressed it, we may plead Paul as a pre- cedent upon the present occasion. Providentially called, in the regular discharge of an official duty, to address you, fath- ers and brethren of this venerable Synod, I may rightly choose the theme the Apostle furnishes. It is the duty of the chris- tian ministry to remind their hearers that they are, not only christians, but citizens and patriots ; that the scriptures clear- ly and often enjoin the careful discharge of civil obligations ; and that obedience to lawful rulers is obedience to God him- self; and it is the duty of ministers to remind each other that these claims of the civil government are to be laid before the people. I exhort you, my brethren in the ministry, as Paul exhorted Titus, "Put the people in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates." Nor is it only by Paul's direct example that we may indi- cate the propriety of this topic in the opening discourse of the Synod. If any duty, proper for a christian, may be prop- erly considered by christian ministers and elders ; if any teachings proper for the people, are proper for our ecclesiastic- al gatherings ; if duties binding on individuals, bind no less those who bear the responsibilities of office in the church, timely discussions especially become this service. The times in which we live are indeed times of unparalleled agitation and excitement. Men are swayed by their aroused passions and prejudice rather than by the calm voice of reason and truth; and ministers of the gospel and ecclesiastical assemblies are liable to hasty words and rash judgments. These seem, in the view of some, scarcely times to settle the proper grounds of duty, as the Church of Christ stand related to civil socie- ty. And yet such is the reasoning of shallow and timid minds. These are the very times in which to discuss earnest- ly just such questions. " A word spoken in the season how good it is." "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver." The opportune time to rebuke any sin, is when the sin abounds ; to sustain any truth, is when it suffers denial ; to enforce any duty, is when that duty is trampled under foot ; when the enemy comes in like a flood, it is the Spirit of the Lord who prompts and bids us lift up a standard against him ; and when, not only wrong doctrines are proclaimed, but when the attempt is made with a high hand to carry them into prac- tical execution, he is a cowardly soldier who stands back from the fight because the storm of battle rages high. Let us in- deed guard against the warping influence of exciting times ; but these are the very times for instructing men upon these questions which pertain to our civil duties. Now men will hear, and think too, as ordinarily they do not ; when awaken- ed interest has broken up the fallow-ground of careless hearts, wise men should sow diligently the seeds of righteous prin- ciples which shall sink through the sods, to lie there perhaps through a stormy and inclement season, but to shoot up in the spring and harvest that rapidly follow. In every other mat- ter the Church of God judges that Providence bids her observe the times ; suit her instructions to the changing necessities of the people ; stand boldly up to a crisis, especially when it comes through none of their own seeking ; and look for the Di- vine blessing only in faithfully withstanding every evil. Why should we not judge that the duty of the church to the gov- ernment under which they are, should be specially discussed when the discussion is specially needed ? There can be no controversy among us touching the ques- tion of subjection to the legitimate civil authorities of the land. Happily, the teachings of the sacred volume are ex- plicit upon this important matter. They declare to us that civil government is an ordinance of Divine appointment ; that civil rulers act by Divine authority; and that citizens should be subject, "not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake." So then, rebellion, treason, or disloyalty, is not only a crime against the civil government, but an off"ence against the laws of God, and should expose the guilty party to precisely the same kind of censure, proportioned to the flagrancy of the off'ence, what would follow any other breach of human and divine laws. The discipline exercised by the Church of Christ towards the delinquencies of men may be of various forms ; 6 it may be exercised towards many different offences ; but the common basis of all is the teaching of God's holy word ; and every form of church instruction and church authority — one as truly as another — must be according to this rule. All are not of equal influence and importance, but all stand on the same basis. If a minister of God rebukes or reproves ; if a church judicatory judicially condemns, or authoritatively ex- pounds or declares, just so much power have they as they have of truth ; taking cognizance of the same individuals and of the same crimes with the civil magistrate, they still exer- cise over these but spiritual powers ; the civil authorities may punish a man for fraud or murder, and this interferes not with the distinct sentence of the Church for the same offence ; whatever be the offence, the Church can but treat it in its spiritual aspects ; but from this she is not to be deterred by the fact that any offence has also its entangling relations to earthly things. But agreeing upon the general duties of the christian patriot, there is now a conflict in this nation and in the church to which we belong, between those who a little while ago seemed firmly united in one sentiment of national loyalty. There are those among us, on the one hand, who yield our cordial support to the Government of this great nation in the exercise of governmental powers ; fully believing that these, so far as our forms are concerned, are constitutional ; and that so far as all our citizens and all the world are concerned, they are legitimate and wise and just. We recognize no such evils in the administration of this Government as would jus- tify the mildest civil war ; we claim for it a kindly and be- neficent and prosperous working, so far at least as our own citizens are concerned, far beyond any ever yet seen under human guidance ; and we aver that the American citizen who shrinks from the duty of entire loyalty at such a time as this, is recreant to the very highest duty of a citizen as enjoined in the word of God. On the other hand there are those who, granting the gen- eral basis of loyal duty as commanded in the Scriptures, do jet affirm that in the contest between the Northern and South- ern States of this Unions there is a conflict of loyal claims, and that to stand on either side of this contest is so consist- ent with christian character that the church of God may not venture to utter her voice upon the subject. It is alleged as a grave question for our consideration whether a citizen owes loyalty first to the Union, whose national existence alone has ever been recognized by other human Governments, or first to the particular State in which he dwells, and whose present impulses or apparent interests seem to clash with the biddings of the General Government. And although the General Assembly of our Church has taken ground upon this question, and as we believe only as such a body should ; and although those who protested against the action of the General Assem- bly, generally, if not unanimously, professed their own loy- alty to the National Government, and agreed that the South- ern disloyalty had no sufficient justification ; yet the position now held by many in our Southern churches, received from these protestants an unhappy appearance of plausibility, and even of authority, when the]statement is made that the Church of God is not competent to decide this question, which de- mands the investigation of the Church, and makes it appro- priate for the people of God to sustain the Assembly. For the stand taken was proper, and^the utterance bothjoyal and timely. The one general statement which we affirm is, that the sphere of the Church of Christ embraces all moral obligations of men ; and that the power of reproving any moral evil im- plies and includes necessarily the power to determine the na- ture of that evil and the fact of its existence. If the Church may undeniably reprove disloyalty as a sin against God, then may she also inquire wherein does disloyalty consist. No matter that her inquiries lead her by paths she is not wont to tread. If the law of God is written in Hebrew and Greek? the Church must study languages to become its interpreter : if the doctrinal heretic hides himself in the mazes of a misty and vain philosophy, the Church must study metaphysics to 8 expose its folly: if men trample upon the law of God and then run for shelter behind the ramparts of political opinions? the Church may attack and storm their fortress, justified by the object she has in view, so long as she uses legitimate means to reach it. The chief aim of a physician is to heal diseases. But this presupposes that he must be able to dis- tinguish diseases, their reality, nature and extent, and that he may go where the patient is to be found, though he should enter disreputable abodes and prescribe to wicked persons. So they who maintain the authority of that law which the Apostle tells us " was made for the lawless and the disloyal,"* (see the original word, 1 Tim. 1:9,) are competent to follow where the law goes, to judge the wide wanderings of human trans- gression. If any man ventures to raise his hand against a law- ful authority, the Church is expressly justified in condemning that very thing: the excuses he makes she is competent to weigh : and we may as well give up church authority altogether as allow that any plea of innocence or justification is a bar to jurisdiction. Admit that disloyalty is a crime and its investi- gation is a right. If even, ,^as is alleged, there is a conflict between the State and the National Authorities, the Church of God does not depart from her sphere when she speaks of such things : and even upon the principles of these protest- ants she is abundantly justified in speaking now, because this is not the true state of the present case. We do not claim, let it be distinctly understood, that the Church of God is bound always to utter her voice when ques- tions of loyalty are discussed in any community. The revo- lutions which sometimes take place in civil government usually proceed through so many changes : the "long train of abuses" tending towards despotism may gather its strength so slowly, that the very difficulty of deciding where allegiance is extin- guished and resistance may begin, may be thought a valid reason why wise men and a wise Church should go forward only at the manifest biddings of Providence. Every case of * dnnfoTaxrotSj " Contumaces, refractarios, contemptores magistratuum ac legura »'oiuiu(iiie per quos publica administrautur." — Rosenmui.lbr. duty that depends upon the changes of time and circumstan- ces, involves its own peculiar perplexities ; and just where her individual members may hesitate as to the path of duty, move slowly and wait for light, may the Church of God do likewise. Or if beyond this, Ave allow more serious and care- ful deliberation before her voice is uttered, we still affirm that the principles upon which the christian duty of any person is decided, are the same principles upon which the Church may decide her action. So long as the Church confines her decisions to questions of moral duty, she is within her proper sphere; and this none the less because legal rights or politi- cal principles may be involved in the same. If two of her members claim each a legal right to a disputed estate, she is no judge or divider between them ; and yet she may inquire into the facts, and issue her reproofs upon the charge that the pretensions of one are forged or dishonest. The propriety of the action of the General Assembly in declaring the obligations of our national loyalty may be af- firmed in view of the great moral importance of the questions at issue. In the First place, the doctrine of Secession is itself a direct breach of the Covenant made in the United States Constitu- tution and adopted by the people of the entire Union. This cannot be evaded by saying that the question turns upon the construction of a political matter ; unless the Church is con- sistently to refuse her reproofs of crime because of the mere difficulty of proving it. There is no difficulty in understand- ing the breach of Covenant. Its VI article expressly makes the United States Constitution the supreme law of the land, so binds the judges in every State, and this expressly, "any- thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." We need not discuss now any reasons which might justify the people of the United States in throw- ing ofi" the United States Constitution. We merely say that having adopted that Constitution, there is no longer any room for the question whether the State or the Nation is supreme : and the man who makes his State allegiance his reason for 9 10 disloyalty to the Nation is, upon the very face of the docu- ment, a covenant breaker. Secondly, Secession involves abundant perjury. Among the thousands of office-holders in the Southern States, whether for State or Federal offices, every man swore solemnly to sup- port the United States Constitution ; among the thousands of naturahzed citizens, every man took an oath, in which not a word is said about State authority, but where allegiance to the United States is solemnly promised, and allegiance to ev- ery other sovereign power solemnly renounced. There was no room for these men to raise the question of State or national supremacy, and how many of them are this day perjured. Thirdly. The crime of disloyalty itself, is the very highest a citizen can commit in that capacity; and is of sufficient import- ance to demand that Church Assemblies should take cognizance of it, and decide when it has been committed, even though this should seem to demand the investigation of political princi- ples. If one single church member had been guilty of these things — of the breach of covenant, of the perjury, of the trea- son involved in secession, he would have found no relief from the censure of the Church, on the plea that it was but a po- litical offence. Yet the principles involved are the same, and are only the more dangerous and deserving of pointed rebuke, when thousands have used them to turn the nation upside down. If we admit that the Church of God is the just inter- preter of the moral law, then we must demand in her an ac- quaintance with the facts and principles which enable her to make a just interpretation. We do not excuse her from the discharge of her duty upon the plea that it is difficult or del- icate : we do not allow that the liability of making an unwise or unjust decision should lead the Church to shrink from ma- king any decision at all; we see no reason why a righteous interpretation of the moral law may not furnish a term of christian communion with as little objection as the interpreta- tion of even minor matters of doctrine, which we so frequently make. We believe that scarcely any matter of interpretation touching the law of God, is of greater importance to the well- 11 being of society, of individuals, and of the Church itself, than that which regards the duties whicli citizens owe to a lawful government. We are willing that the largest exercise of pru- dence and wisdom should be shown by the Church in discus- sing and deciding upon questions that are related to the pol- itics of the land ; but so far as these things have any moral bearinor, the Church of God should understand them, and bear her timely testimony respecting them. Let the mischievous dogma, "religion has nothing to do with politics," become the settled faith of this land; let the Churches endorse the error, and the ruin of the nation is sealed. Carry out the principle consistently, and we will observe no more fast days for national sins; offer no more prayers for national rulers, and urge no righteous principles in the conducting of our elections. But the Church has to do with morals, even in politics ; and if she may rebuke any sin, she is competent to ask. What is the na- ture of this sin? and in whom does it exist? And surely if any sin against authorities may ever be rebuked, the very highest crime of which a citizen is capable, must not stand forth as the exception. Rebellion is a proper object for the censures of the Church; it is within the sphere of the Church to ascertain whether this sin is or is not committed within her borders ; and while we acknowledge the right of revolution on the part of an oppressed people to be justified by the circum- stances which bring it into being, we aver that the pulpits of this laud, and the ecclesiastical Assemblies of this land should teach the people that there is the widest possible difference between revolutions against despotism, and insurrections against constitutional law. For the General Assembly to exercise this power was also but to do as our ecclesiastical Assemblies have ever done in all our history. Even in times when the divine right of kings found acknowledgment far beyond the claims now conceded to civil rulers, the Church of Scotland had no hesitation in making her voice heard in civil affairs. And it ought to be acknowledged that when our venerable mother Synod supported the Continental Congress in the times of the Revolutionary 12 War, it was a step far in advance of the action of the late General Assembly. Without denying, even while in profes- sion supporting the authority of the King of Great Britain, the Presbyterian churches of this land were exhorted to sup- port and to pray for the Continental Congress, though it had taken up arms against the king. Surely a church that could gather the evidence and decide upon it, to bid the people break the bonds of allegiance, may lawfully teach their right- eous maintenance. To decide that a legitimate govern- ment has become oppressive; to urge citizens to give up their former loyalty; to come out boldly in favor of a new system of things, is certainly a far more difficult thing, than to maintain a long-existing and beneficent government. And the inferior judicatories of our Church have not hesitated to exercise the very right to speak on those subjects which the Assembly has claimed. This has been done in all sections of the land. The Synod of South Carolina sanctioned the secession movement in advance of the action of that State. Other Synods and Presbyteries in all the land have felt free to act on both sides of the question. Indeed those who chieiiy oppose the Assembly's action, have yet declared that such action might properly be taken by the Presbyteries and Synods of tbe North; and that if Presbyte- ries were all united, they might declare their sentiments as freely as they please. This, in our view, settles the full pro- priety of the Assembly's decision. When the question was discussed, and these things fairly admitted; when ministers claimed the right to contend for these principles in public, by pulpit and press, no wonder the majority rapidly changed sides and declared that the Assembly could do so too. For surely principles like these depend neither upon place nor numbers : no Church Assembly has an authority to be denied to another. If a Presbytery or Synod may declare the citi- zen's duty to his country, no precept of the Bible, and no sol- id reasonings forbid the General Assembly to do the same. We should not forget, moreover, that this very question of loyalty is so clearly taught in the Scriptures, is of so pressing 13 importance, and comes before Christian people so frequently, that it was already virtually settled all over the land by the members and Ministers of every Church. We could not ignore these principles. The Divine word says too much about gov- ernment, enjoins too clearly the duty of a citizen, and calls too explicitly for the constant offering of public and private prayer, to allow us to escape the responsibility of deciding where our fealty is due, on the plea that we are meddling with politics. Even those High Church Prelatists, who stand so much above the sphere of common mortals that they can- not stoop to touch a moral question, and who universally, as we believe, refused to decide this matter in their conventions, were yet compelled to decide it in their separate congrega- tions' and in the worship of every Sabbath. In fact, every pulpit in the land decided this very question before the As- sembly met. If any minister formerly prayed for the U. S. Government, and now neglected it, this falling off from for- mer duty was a disloyal decision; any minister praying for different rulers decided the question. Why should a Church assembly stand back from that which necessarily must be done in the regular discharge of his duty by every minister in his pulpit, and indeed by every christian at the family altar? Especially, why should our Assembly, that had never before hesitated to express its loyalty, stop at the very juncture when such hesitation would have all the fatal effects of a dis- loyal decision? For it is our firm conviction, not only that a decision given when the times demand it, in the face of opposition, either temporizing or disloyal, is worth a thousand formal expres- sions of more peaceful times, but that the situation of thou- sands of Presbyterians in the Southern States demanded this support to their loyalty from the supreme judicatory of the Church. Three classes of Presbyterians were in the South : First. — Those who were disloyal, and meant to be so, in spite of all expositions and expostulations on the part of their brethren; and these deserved the full force of our plainest rebukes; nor are their sincere convictions any better defence 14 for their treason, than the similar sincerity of thousands of Prelatists, Romanists, Baptists and Arminians, against whose departure from christian doctrine as we receive it, the Pres- byterian Church testifies. Secondly. — There are men in the South who thought that a position of neutrality, both in Church and State, was fitting in such a crisis ; and these may receive our pity or our scorn, according as we classify them in the wide extremes of weak- ness on the one hand, or secret disloyalty on the other. But thirdly. — The men of the South who are truly loyal to this Government, deserved and should have received the cor- dial support of the General Assembly in declaring the au- thority to which their allegiance, for conscience sake, was due. Nothing can be further, both from the words and sense of the Assembly's declarations, than to allege that loyal men are harshly and cruelly treated. They were supported, just as the deliverances of the Church ever support a conscientious man, by declaring the clear views of the Supreme Assembly upon a duty from which he is tempted to decline. It may be acknoAvledged that many of these men were surrounded by difficult and trying circumstances, and that even they might be more suspected and harassed because of the Assembly's action; but they were enjoined to support the Federal Gov- ernment only " so far as in them lay ; " and even those of them who felt that the Assembly acted inexpediently would be disposed, just so far as they were truly loyal, to approve of the design and spirit of this entire action. And just be- cause the sphere of the Church lies in morals and matters of conscience, all the arguments on this subject drawn from the actual exercise of authority over Southern men by the South- ern Confederacy, are nothing to the purpose. It is claimed that the Church must recognize a de facto government. But this is far from being so, absolutely and without regard to the nature and character of the government. The Church should teach men, and especially should tell her own members in an liour of trial, that more is required to change a man's allegiance, than the mere power over his person and his pro- 15 perty. Men may be prisoners of war in the hands of their enemies ; they may be captives in a robber's cave or a pirate's vessel; they may fall into the hands of a mob or a feeble in- surrection, and in all these cases they may be subject to pow- ers which it would be madness to resist. Under such au- thority, men may be obliged to submission and obedience, but they do not owe loyalty. It is one thing to be subject for wrath — it may be quite another to be subject for conscience sake. The Church of God would not put arms into a mar- tyr's hands, but she would aid him to maintain his principles the hour of sternest trial ; and we believe that many a loyal conscience in the South was strengthened by the affirmation of the Assembly's loyalty. To resist existing authority, is not to resist lawful authority, and this especially when the existing authority has itself had but a brief existence, has risen upon resistance to authority long reverenced as legiti- mate, and is justified by no oppression felt by the loyal sub- ject. Such a government may bind the limbs, confiscate the property, or command the unwilling service. Let religion and the Church speak just here, as they should, to say it can- not bind the conscience. So far are we from agreeing with these protestants when they declare this action of the Assembly to be a departure from our old paths, we allege that their views tend to a dan- gerous form of high church peculiarities, foreign to the dis- tinctive spirit of Presbyterianism, and now attenpting its en- croachments upon us to the signal marring of our spiritual prosperity. Is it not significant, as indicating what true Presbyterianism is, that among the many Presbyterian bodies of this land — and, as we have said, including our own inferior judicatories — the Old School General Assembly alone has need to vindicate its jurisdiction in this case ? Should it not be thought that one passage from our own Confession of Faith is decisive of the question? "They who, upon pretence of christian liberty, do practice any sin, * * do thereby de- stroy the end of christian liberty." "And because the pow- ers which God hath ordained, and the liberty which Christ 16 hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but mu- tually to uphold and preserve one another ; they who, upon the pretence of christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or eccle- siastical, resist the ordinance of God." (Conf. Faith, ch. xx: § 3 and 4.) God alone is Lord of the conscience; but the pretence of either christian or civil liberty is no bar to the in- vestigation of offences. Nor can the views of the protestants be consistently carried out without the utter destruction of all that is orderly and distinctive in the Presbyterian Church. It is true, in one sense, that "the Church has no right to make anything a condition of christian or ministerial fellowship which is not enjoined or required in the Scriptures and the standards of the Church ;" but it is not Presbyterianism to make our terms of communion so wide as to admit every man who recognizes the authority of the Scriptures; every man whose christian character we presume not to deny ; nor even every man who can subscribe to our doctrinal standards. Without now discussing the relative importance of doctrine and duty, we affirm that ''truth is in order to godliness ;" that the consciences of christian men may as rightly be of- fended at immorality as at heresy; and that a Church which so clearly defines its doctrinal position and stands separate from so many conscientious christians in other communions, need not wonder that thousands of her members revolt at the thought of sitting down at the Lord's table in unbroken christian fellowship with men who plead for the perpetuity of slavery, who are among the cliief abettors of treason, and whose hands, in a warfare unjustifiable and Avicked, both as to its means and its ends, are dyed in the blood of their brethren. To these things we may add that a position of neutrality, deliberately taken, seemed as really a decision of the ques- tion as that the Assembly made. This made the adoption of any other paper than the one first offered to the Assembly so undesirable. This, in part, accounts for the change in the votes. Many persons, induced partly by policy, partly by 17 the usual position of extreme conservatism held by our Church, partly by the Assembly's practice which rarely de- cides questions in ihesi,* voted at first to do nothing ; but when they were disposed to do anything, they could stop no- where short of what the Assembly did. We cannot consent to the statements so widely made, that outside pressure forced the Assembly's action. Men accustomed to watch closely the Assembly's doings will declare that rarely has that body known efforts more strenuous, more unjustifiable or more per- sistent to prevent any loyal expression. Weeks before the Assembly met the key note was struck by influential fingers "that the Assembly would do only the usual routine of busi- ness ;" and though of course this was without authority, it was urgod as a pledge that the Presbyteries expected the Assembly's silence, and had its influence upon the earliest voting. And though in a time of so much excitement we wonder not that the members were earnest on their respective sides; and we care not, as we could, to cast back the charge of undue pressure, we cannot but think that such a com- plaint comes with the worst possible grace from men who first attempted, and in the most discourteous manner, to gag dis- cussion; who first introduced telegraphic interference from Cabinet officers ; who arrayed the influence of prominent min- isters, not members of the house, against the Assembly's ac- tion ; whose very papers, offered for adoption, were prepared by such hands; whose sentiments were reiterated around the social board in the very hospitalities the Assembly enjoyed; and w^hose threatenings of the division of the Church, in con- sequence of this action, were as loud and as long as any threats against it. We affirm that a deliberate neutrality was impossible. The Assembly took the right ground ; or should have taken none ; and the very language of the protest con- fesses this. The protestants found it impossible to speak and * Although the General Assembly usually avoi.is decisions m