do appoint the following Committee to prepare an answer to the last communication from the Foreign Secretary of State, which was laid on the table. They authorise the Moderator to subscribe said answer, and to report to the Commission in August the state of the correspondence on the subject, viz. :-The Moderator, Dr Cunningham, Dr Candlish, Dr Clason, Sir George Sinclair, Mr Hawkins, Mr Murray Dunlop ;-The Moderator, Convener.

Extracted from the Records of the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland by

THOMAS PITCAIRN, Cl. Eccl. Scot. Lib.

No. 12.-LETTER from Rev. Dr MAKELLAR to the EARL OF

MALMESBURY.

EDINBURGH, June 28. 1852.

MY LORD, The Committee of the Free Church of Scotland for the Conversion of the Jews, having reported to the General Assembly of that Church the proceedings which have lately taken place relative to the expulsion of their missionaries from the Austrian dominions, and the correspondence which has passed on that subject between the Committee and the Foreign Office, including your Lordship's letter of the 13th May, I have been directed by the Assembly to reply, in their name, to that letter.

In doing so, I need not assure your Lordship of the earnest desire of the Assembly to bear themselves towards Her Majesty's Government with the utmost deference and respect, and to avoid everything which may unduly tend to interfere with the efforts of your Lordship successfully to vindicate the honour of the country, and to obtain reparation for injuries done to the subjects of the Queen.

It is satisfactory to the Assembly to learn from the letter above referred to, that it is not your Lordship who accuses the missionaries of having violated the laws of the Austrian empire. In the statement of the substance of the despatches from the Austrian Government, communicated by your Lordship to the Committee, the Assembly do not discover the allegation that any one of the acts charged against the missionaries was in violation of the then subsisting laws of the empire. They believe that no such allegation can with truth be made, and they rejoice to find that no accusation of a breach of law has originated with, or been adopted by, your Lordship, for an impression of a different nature was produced by the terms employed by your Lordship in former letters, in which your Lordship characterised acts alleged against the missionaries as in violation of law, while no such character seemed to be ascribed to these acts by that Government itself.

Your Lordship observes that "Her Majesty's Government cannot argue with Austria on the nature of those laws." The Assem

F

bly are not able to see how it should not be possible for Her Majesty's Government to remonstrate with that of a friendly and allied State on the intolerance of its laws, especially as applied to the subjects of this kingdom, in which the most unfettered liberty is allowed to the citizens of that State, and to all others, to propagate religious opinions; but what was mainly sought at the hands of Her Majesty's Government was, that they should satisfy themselves whether certain British subjects, who had been treated by the direct act of a foreign Government, and without the sentence of any tribunal, as if they had violated the laws of the country in which they were dwelling, had really so violated these laws; and should this foreign Government be unable to show such breach of the laws, that they should obtain the reparation which, in such cases, this country was entitled to demand. The Assembly are not able to discover that your Lordship has ever attempted to argue that question. On the contrary, your Lordship, as stated in the 20th March, that "Her Majesty's Government have abstained from making a formal demand for redress."

Your Lordship further remarks, that "it was at every risk, and in defiance of personal danger," that the expelled missionaries "attempted to propagate their sacred doctrines." The Assembly confidently believe that, if called to labour in savage lands, and among hordes of barbarians, their missionaries would willingly have braved the dangers which have so often encompassed "their religious fraternity," as your Lordship is pleased to denominate the noble army of missionaries and martyrs, who, from the days of the apostles, have sought to carry the glad tidings of salvation to every corner of the earth. In the present case, however, they were sent to labour in a civilised country, subject to settled laws, and the only risk to which they could deem themselves exposed was that of punishment, according to law, in the event of any breach of law on their part. That country, too, was in friendly alliance with their own; and at its court was stationed a representative of their Sovereign to throw the protecting shield of Her kingdom's might over any of the humblest of Her Majesty's subjects who should be unjustly oppressed. In these circumstances, they looked for something more at the hands of the Ambassador and of your Lordship than that you should simply be the channel of transmitting to the Government which had wronged them the statement on their behalf, to satisfy that Government, "if possible," that they did not break the Austrian law. The Assembly venture to think that it lay with the Austrian Government to show that the missionaries had violated the law. They also conceive that the accusation of the Government, whose direct and arbitrary act is complained of, cannot be conclusive on the question at issue; but that the honour of this country requires that Her Majesty's Government should have been satisfied (before they declined to make any demand for redress to these Her Majesty's subjects) that they have not been "unjustly

treated," as your Lordship corrctly considers they must be held to have been, if they have not violated the laws of the empire.

The Assembly regret to learn "that the Austrian Government will not tolerate religious proselytism, and will not forego the legal right of expelling all who attempt to spread conversion" but they are unable to see how it follows from this, that your Lordship should have little hope "of obtaining compensation for any losses" sustained by the missionaries. This compensation is not claimed in respect of any prohibition to prosecute their labours in the conversion of the Jews within the Austrian dominions. The Government of Austria has unquestionably the legal right to prohibit missionary labours; and if, in defiance of such prohibition, the missionaries had persevered in them, and had been summarily removed in consequence, any claim of compensation might have been excluded. No such prohibition, however, was issued. Without warning, while offending against no law, and not even disregarding a Government prohibition, but following a course which had been openly pursued for years, not only without objection, but with the sanction of the highest authorities in the provinces in which they laboured, they were summarily expelled in a manner injurious and oppressive in themselves, and derogatory to the dignity of the kingdom of which they were subjects. For reparation on account of this injury, independently of the stoppage of their missionary labours, the intervention of your Lordship has been specially sought; and the Assembly cannot but most deeply deplore that it has not been made in a way likely to secure British subjects against being thus unjustly treated in time to come.

Your Lordship has been pleased to characterise in strong terms. the statements made by the missionaries, as to the manner in which their case was dealt with by the British Embassy at Vienna. Had the Assembly seen reason to believe that these statements were either ungrateful or untrue, they certainly would not have given them their countenance. They have seen, however, no reason to doubt their substantial accuracy; and certainly no one will believe that the British Ambassador had acted with the promptitude and earnestness which the circumstances called for. A postponement, at least, of their expulsion till a more seasonable period of the year, would have been obtained on behalf of three unoffending ministers of the gospel and their families, whose mere personal presence in Austria could have occasioned no anxiety to the Imperial Government.

In reference to the details contained in the communications from the Austrian Government recently transmitted by your Lordship to the Committee, I beg to refer to the statements of the missionaries which accompany this letter.

Your Lordship, in conclusion, refers to the difficulties created in the negotiation with the Austrian Government, by the publication of speeches calculated to irritate that Government, and the Assembly can easily understand how,--your Lordship "having left it

to the good feelings of that Government to decide whether they think fit to afford any compensation,"-the sentiments expressed at public meetings may be employed as an excuse for declining to make such compensation. Had your Lordship demanded redress for a grievous wrong inflicted on subjects of Her Majesty, they venture to think that the demand on the part of the Government would have been aided and not impeded by the strong feeling of sympathy and indignation which the treatment of these missionaries has awakened throughout the country.-I have the honour to be, my Lord, your Lordship's most obedient, humble servant, A. MAKELLAR, Moderator.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Malmesbury,

Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,

&c. &c., London.

P.S.-I beg to state, that your letter, of date June 17, to the Rev. A. Moody Stuart, together with the abstract relative to the sale of the property belonging to Messrs Wingate and Smith, has been communicated to these gentlemen, who are not at present resident in Edinburgh. I may observe, however, that the case, as put in the letter I have now the honour to send, does not seem likely to be at all affected by any explanations which they may have to give on so subordinate a matter as the valuation and sale of furniture under such a sudden pressure as they were exposed to.

No. 13.-LETTER to the EARL OF MALMESBURY from the Rev. DR MAKELLAR.

EDINBURGH, July 15. 1852.

MY LORD,-In reply to your Lordship's letter of 17th June, I am now enabled to transmit the answer I have received from Mr Wingate, which is in these terms:

"When a claim for damages was made out, it was only done at the urgent desire,-I might almost say demand,—of Earl Granville on our leaving the Foreign Office in February last, and when our claim for compensation was sent in, it was accompanied by a note from the Hon. Arthur Kinnaird, in which he repeated how unwillingly we complied with Earl Granville's wish, and that our design, in appealing to the British Government for redress, was not to obtain pecuniary compensation, and that we had only stated a sum, because his Lordship had said it was indispensable to the formality of the appeal he intended to make to the Imperial Government of Austria. The sum claimed is within the actual loss. Had I known that our claim was to subject so many parties in Pesth to be dragged before the military police, I certainly would have positively refused to make any claim whatever. I will not condescend to go into details about the value of tables and chairs,

neither with Austria or the Foreign Office. If the Earl of Malmesbury chooses to claim a pecuniary compensation as an acknowledgment of their gross violation of the`r own laws and of the rights of hospitality-well; if not, I have done with it." *

In accordance with these sentiments are the very general terms in which this part of the subject is referred to in the Memorial presented to Earl Granville, simply asking "redress for the loss and injury they have sustained ;" and also the refusal, on the part of Mr Edward, to present any pecuniary claim whatever. With Mr Wingate's declining to enter into the subject I fully concur, believing, as I stated in my last letter to your Lordship, that the case cannot be "at all affected by any explanations which the missionaries may have to give on so subordinate a matter as the valuation and sale of furniture under such a sudden pressure as they were exposed to."

No intimation has reached us of an offer, referred to in Parliament, on the part of the Austrian Government, to pay the travelling expenses of the missionaries.

In the papers I had the honour of transmitting to your Lordship with my letter of 28th June, I find I have omitted Mr Edward's statement of the matters referred to in the Hon. Mr Grey's Memorandum. Mr Edwards says, that, having received notice to quit the Austrian dominions, and having appealed without success to the Gallician Courts, he sent a written statement of his case to the Earl of Westmoreland. Eight days after he went to Vienna, where he both applied for assistance at the British Embassy, and used every endeavour directly with the Austrian Government. When his own efforts failed he repaired again to the Embassy, and, on the ground of his whole proceedings having been both according to law and of express permission, he asked Lord Westmoreland to interpose and procure, if possible, a reversal of the edict, or failing in this, to obtain some modification of the manner in which it was to be carried into effect. He communicated the state of his wife's health, and his fears of her suffering from so long and hurried a journey at such a season of the year,-fears which he afterwards felt to be justified, by the early death of the child to which she birth at Breslau. Lord Westmoreland did not refuse to repregave sent his case to the Austrian Government, but stated that he was not entitled to interfere officially on his behalf. From these applications to the British ambassador, Mr Edward did not, to his own knowledge, derive any benefit. Having afterwards been informed (on the 12th of January) by the central police, that his petition to the Minister of the Interior was not sustained, and having further been refused permission to return to Lemberg to remove his family, Mr Edward made a final solicitation at the embassy for assistance. Mr Grey states that, in consequence of his application to the Embassy, the Earl of Westmoreland procured permission for him to return to Lemberg and settle his affairs, but of this Mr Edward

* See Note B.