making fettlements of ministers in the feveral parishes throughout this church. It is not unknown to you, that this truth caused a great deal of confufion in feveral corners of the country; that a great part of the people have, on that very account, feparated from the established church; and many more have fallen into an indifference about religion, and given over attendance upon public inftruction altogether. Now there are fome things upon this fubject that I must needs take for granted; because I cannot find any thing more evidently true than they are in themselves by which I might prove them; fuch as that the inftruction of a nation in religion, is a matter of very great importance, and that you all believe it to be fo; that there is no ground to hope that people will receive benefit by the inftructions of those whom they hate and abhor, and that it is impoffible they can receive benefit from thofe inftructions which they will not hear. There is one thing more, which to me appears as evident as any of them, that no compulfion ought to be used to constrain men's choice in matters of religion. From thefe I think it plainly follows, that violent fettlements, that is to fay, giving a man a ftipend, with a charge to instruct and govern the people within a certain diftrict, the whole of which people do abfolutely refufe to fubject themselves to his ministry, are, to say the leaft, abfolutely unprofitable, and the money that is bestowed upon the perfon fo fettled, is wholly thrown away.

There are not a few in whofe hearing if I fhould express myself as above, they would immediately reply, All this is very true, and we are forry for it; but as the law now stands with regard to patronages, how can it he helped? Now, though I am far from being of these gentlemen's opinions, that this matter might not be made much better even as the law now ftands, if the church were fo difpofed as I hope fhortly to fhow, yet I will fuppose it for a little, and make a few reflections upon the conduct of many in that fuppofed fituation.

And firft, they muft forgive me if I fay that I can by no means believe the hardfhip of the law of patronage lies very heavy upon their spirits, or at leaft if it does they support themselves under it with furprifing firmnefs, and discover

not the least outward fign of uneafinefs. Are they ever heard to complain of it, unless in a constrained manner, when others mention it before them? Do they not shew all willingness to appoint fuch fettlements-to enforce them, to defend them? Do they in the least discountenance fuch probationers as accept of prefentures unconditionally, although it cannot be pretended that the law obliges any man to this? On the contrary, are not these the men whom they love and delight in, whofe characters they celebrate for knowledge and understanding, and for difinterested virtue..

I do confefs then I am apt to doubt the fincerity of those gentlemen, when they profefs their forrow for the hardships they are under by the patronage act; because some apparent tokens of their concern might have been expect. ed, and are no where to be seen. But alas! why am I expreffing my fufpicions what is our fituation? things are changing fo faft, that it is impoffible to write even fuch a book as this with propriety, and fuited to the times; for even fince I wrote the above paragraph I have received information from Edinburgh, which if it had come before it was written, would have prevented the writing of it; and even, if not for mangling my own book, I would yet expunge it. I am affured, that laft May it was openly profeffed by fome in the aflembly, that presentures were of all others, the best way of fettling preachers; and that it was the proto pseudon of men of my principles to imagine otherwise. This proto pseudon is a phrafe which I do not understand, and therefore must let it alone. may be a phrase of fome of the learned languages, and it may be of no language at all. However, I have recorded it with great fidelity, as I am informed the gentleman pronounced it. And whatever is its particular fignification, I fuppofe its general meaning is, that patronages are no grievance, but a bleffing. As therefore, it is probable that your lordships and honors have this many times affirmed to you, it is neceffary that I should first attempt to prove what I thought had been felf-evident, that we are in a bad fituation, before I crave your affiftance for

It

A

MODERATOR,

S it is ufual for people to differ almost upon every fubject, I am not surprised that there should be fome in this Affembly, who are for appointing, that this tranfportation fhall take place; but I apprehend it is really ground of furprise, to see the way in which they urge their opinion; they do not speak as if they were weighing and deJiberating upon the caufe, that they might be able to give a just determination; they do not speak as if clearly fatisfied themselves; or as if they defired to convince others, and bring them over to their own opinion; but they speak in overbearing manner, and prefs the conclufion with a visible displeasure at the time spent upon it, and impatience that any body should differ from, or contradict them. But as pofitiveness is feldom any ftrong prefumption of a good caufe, fo I think it is very much misplaced here; and as the quiet and comfort of a large parish immediately, and the whole country fide more remotely, depends

upon our decifion, I hope the affembly will not give it, till after mature deliberation and with real impartiality.

The first thing, no doubt, to be confidered, is, whether the commiffion have exceeded their powers, that we may fee whether we have room at all for the other queftion, about the expediency of this transportation; and after reading the words of the affembly's remit, I cannot help being of opinion, with the great majority of the members of Prefbytery, that the commiffion had no power to determine this caufe. Is it not plain that this is not the caufe which was before thé laft affembly? And is it not confeffed on all hands, that the commiffion had no title to take in any caufes, but fuch as were remitted to them? Is it not plain, that the words in any after ques tion relating to this settlement, are not to be found in it? It is alfo proper to observe, from the almost conftant ufe of these words in the remits of the affembly, that they do not fuppofe that a queftion relating to the fame fettlement with another, makes it the fame caufe. The anfwer made to this is, that it was a mistake or omiffion in the clerk of the affembly. Admitting, Sir, that this had been the cafe, it would be extremely wrong and dangerous, to approve the commiffion in paying no regard to that legal defect, but taking in the cause. For the affembly itself to make free with, and despise established forms of procedure, is of the very worst confequence. I have heard fome honorable members, eminently fkilled in the law, affirm, that for a court to defpife even its own forms, is to make way for the admiffion of many inftances of great and real injuftice. But for the commiffion, which is a delegated court, fo far to come over form, as to take in a caufe not remitted to them, is a bold tranfgreffion with a witnefs; and if allowed, must be attended with confequences, which it is impoffible to forefee, but can scarce be imagined worse, than they really will be in effect.

But Sir, why should any fay this was either an omiffion in the clerks, or an overfight in the last assembly. I am fure for my part, I think they would have done wrong, had they done it in any other way. What is the reafon of this claufe, (or any after queftion) when it is inferted.