صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

Established Church, if these edifices were to be appropriated to its use, would be a gainer under discreditable circumstances,-under circumstances that were inconsistent, he thought, with the honour of the nation to permit, inasmuch as the Established Church was a public institution, that belonged to the nation,-which was public property. The Committee, therefore, thought Parliament had to do with the question in this way. They were impressed with the consideration, that if these places of worship were erected under the condition of being made parish churches, if they were not made parish churches, that that was a question to be tried. But, granting even that that was a question on which the civil courts might decide, there was a higher question, which properly came before Parliament, as an arena for its discussion, namely, in how far that great public institution, as a part of the national institution of which her Majesty is the special protector and guardian, will permit the rights of private property to be assailed. For his own part, he thought that a point might have been stretched,—that some effort might have been made on behalf of the interests of essential justice in this case; for he could not forget that the thing was by no means unprecedented. There was a case where some such interference as they desired from the Legislature was conceded. The case was not altogether parallel to this, as the parties interested were not members of the Free Church of Scotland; if they had, perhaps their success would not have been much greater than our own. (A laugh.) But the case was one in which the parties had exposed themselves to penalties under the law of this country for engaging in unlawful sports for gains; and in this case the Legislature interfered, and changed the law, in order to save the parties implicated from the consequences of their own conduct. Now, this House and the Church were aware that the Committee of which he was a member, under the charge of Dr Begg, issued a memorial and statement in regard to quoad sacra churches; and perhaps, also, he might presume of the House being aware of the fact that that memorial had led to the appearance of another, that a memorial had been issued by the Home Mission of the Establishlishment, apparently drawn up by Dr Simpson, upon which encomiums had been passed by members of that Assembly, one learned Professor of which had stated that Dr Simpson had spoken the real truth on the subject; and another reverend Doctor said that not one of the facts had been contradicted. Of course that plainly implied that our reverend friend does not know that many of the statements in Dr Simpson's alleged facts have been contradicted, although it was taken for granted that many of these facts received no contradiction. But the fact was, that many of them were contradicted and overturned in the statements drawn up by the Free Church Committee, for Parliament, some months ago; and, of course, numerous contradictions were given to them in the inferior courts of this Church. He had asked Mr Gibson to give their reverend friend a specimen of a few contradictions of the statements contained in Dr Simpson's memorial; for he thought it right their friend should be made aware of the extraordinary blunders and prodigious misrepresentations of that extraordinary document. He thought it was desirable for the cause of truth alone, that the amazing confidence of Dr Simpson's eulogies on its accuracy should be overthrown. In regard to the position of this matter of the quoad sacra churches, as he had said, they had received no encouragement as to Legislative interference in their favour. The Assembly were aware that there were civil processes going on in regard to the quoad sacra churches; but with these the Committee had nothing to do. It was never appointed to take charge of them. He might mention, however, that it was right the Church should know that, even on the supposition that what was deemed a favourable decision were to be given in regard to any of these, it would not take them out of their difficulties and troubles concerning them. The fact was, they had got a favourable decision in the Court of Session in regard to St Paul's Church, Edinburgh,-the very same decision, he believed, that they asked the House of Lords to give them in the case of the Glasgow Churches; and what he wished this House to know was, that a favourable decision of that kind did not relieve them from their embarrassments. The decision in the case of St Paul's was, that that edifice was erected on condition that it should be made a parish church. Their opponents denied that plea, and the Court of Session sustained it in favour of the Free Church. But what was the result? Was that place of worship now handed over to them? Not at all. That decision being given, the Court called

upon the Procurator of the Established Church to say when they were to fulfil the condition, and he says, give us time. We hope to be able to fulfil the condition by and by. We are now in a better situation than hitherto We have got a new law passed by Sir James Graham, which gives us great help, and we expect to get another Act, or expect to find our constituents so liberal, that we will be enabled to comply with every requirement of Sir James Graham's Act. (Laughter.) Upon this the Court hangs up the case, and how long it might continue they knew not. He was afraid that even if they got a decision in the Glasgow cases, it would lead to the same result. Under these considerations, the Committee had a strong feeling as to the bringing these cases to a conclusion. Their congregations had already suffered, and their interests had suffered, by the delay, and he did not think it was necessary to re-appoint the Committee. He thought some advantages would result from not renewing this Committee at present, for he would not conceal his own impression that it would be better for the Church to lose all these quoad sacra churches to-morrow, than to go on for ten or fifteen years fighting for them in detail. (Hear, hear.) He could not sit down without paying a debt of gratitude to Charles Cowan, Esq. a member of this Assembly, and also a Member of Parliament, for his exertion in connection with this matter. When he (Mr Gray) said that the deputation were looked on coldly in London, in this statement he must make an exception in Mr Cowan's favour. They found, in consequence of his position in the House, his amount of business habits, energy, zeal, and wisdom, the whole proceedings of the deputies were unusually facilitated. His own impression was, that the deputation might have been kept in London, giving attendance for a considerable time longer, but for the friendly offices of Mr Cowan. He must mention, also, another gentleman who showed a peculiar degree of interest in their affairs, and who did them acts of kindness. He referred to Mr Macgregor, one of the members of the city of Glasgow. (Applause.) With these remarks he begged to finish his Report, and to say he was sorry that he had not been able to give the General Assembly any better news on the subject.

Mr GIBSON of Glasgow said-I would just crave leave to say, in reference to the public men which the deputation met with, that, so far as I remember, there was not one who did not fully admit the equity of our case. That is an important matter to be borne in mind. (Hear, hear.) With the leave of the General Assembly, I would notice one or two things contained in a pamphlet, entitled, "Remarks on the Memorial presented to her Majesty's Government, by a Committee of the Free Church," &c. The "Remarks " are written by Dr Simpson, but sanctioned, be it observed, by the General Assembly of the Establishment. There are just one or two things which I should like to notice in reference to these quoad sacra churches having been built with the understanding that they should be parish. It is asserted here, that the great end for which they were built was to provide simply for the destitute. Unquestionably that was the great and paramount end; but the writer of this disingenuous production has failed to notice that, without the parochial machinery, they dispaired of ever reaching it; and yet he is not ashamed to hold up the end as proof that they never contemplated the means. (Hear, hear.) With the permission of the House, I should just like to read a portion of the document to which I refer. (Hear, hear.) "But it is farther asserted that 'Since the Disruption, scarcely anything has been done in the way of Church-extension by the Establishment.' So far from there being a vestige of foundation for this assertion, the indisputable truth is, that at no period have the attention and exertions of the Church been more faithfully, zealously, and successfully directed to this department of duty,-at no period has more been done in accomplishment of the great object of the Church Extension Scheme, viz., the supplying to the destitute portion of the population the means of religious instruction and pastoral superintendence, than since the secession. The spirit of this most Christian and patriotic enterprise, so far from departing with the seceders, or from languishing or decaying, has been manifesting fresh vigour and activity; and the operations of the Committee entrusted with its management have, under the Divine blessing, been crowned with a most abundant and steadily-growing success. Year after year, since 1843, has witnessed an increase over the preceding he, both in the aggregate number of congregations more or less aided from the Fome Mission funds, and also in the number of worshippers of which they are

severally composed; and the same process of increase has taken place in the contributions by which this blessed result has been effected. There are now of unendowed churches and mission stations together upwards of 100 congregations, enjoying by these means the regular preaching of the gospel, with all the relative ministrations of a stated spiritual labourer. These congregations, be it remembered, are composed of the poorest, the most destitute, and outcast portions of the population. Such is the 'scarcely anything' that, since the Disruption, has been done in the way of Church extension by the Establishment.'" (The reading of the passage excited much laughter in the Court and audience.) To the money of the Home Mission Fund which is paid to support chapel ministers is referred to as the proof that in five years they have raised as many as 173 churches, the number erected in the same space of time under the management of the party who left the Establishment. That is a new species of Church extension. (Laughter.) But another proof of no less potency is, that 100 churches, unrighteously seized, and seven mission stations, are the entire demolition of the averment, that scarcely any thing has been done in the way of Church extension by the Establishment, and the proof of most "successful" church building! When, the truth is, not one chapel has been built at all. Yes, I mistake; there has been one. (A laugh.) Now, that is a specimen of their facts, and I beg leave to give another:-"As to the special examples selected and brought forward by the memorialists in proof of their assertion, that a considerable number of the extension churches are locked up by the Established Church for want of congregations to occupy them, these instances, it must of course be supposed, are the strongest cases that could be found for their purpose. Let, then, the truth and correctness of their assertion be tried by the tests which they themselves furnish. The following are the facts in regard to these cases :-The chapels of Greenhead and St Thomas's (Glasgow) have not been in the hands of the Church of Scotland since the secession. They are claimed by other parties. Blackhall (Greenock) is not in the possession of the Church of Scotland. St David's (Kirkintilloch) and St Leonard's (Lanark), have only lately come into the hands of the Church of Scotland. Arrangements are in progress for their being immediately opened with efficient labourers, and with the prospect of a good attendance. Banton (Kilsyth) has remained hitherto unoccupied from the following circumstance. Soon after the secession, arrangements were made for its being opened, and a minister was obtained. But the parish minister, being seized with a serious illness, was obliged to leave his charge and go abroad; and the licentiate appointed to Banton was, in the scarcity of preachers, employed to officiate in the parish church as the more important of the two charges. The parish minister has now returned and resumed his charge, and arrangements are in progress for securing the services of a stated labourer in the chapel also." I believe there is a legal phrase, but I am not very sure that I understand all its bearings,—a phrase as to being accessory after a fact, but here we have an example of being accessory before the fact. Observe what they do in order to contradict the facts of the times that are past. Certain statements are made in regard to matters of fact in years gone by, and they are disproved by allegations as to what may be in the years yet to come. (Laughter.) But let us look at one or two of the cases as specimens. Greenhead was undoubtedly given into the possession of the Establishment by its former minister when he got a parish. Members of the Presbytery of Glasgow have since preached in it, and we all remember the valuable assistance they got in supplying it the other day by the worthy soldier from the barracks. (Laughter.) St Thomas's is a sad case. Why have they not it in possession? Because they refuse to pay the floating debt upon it. And let it be known that that church, with the surrounding ground, has cost the venerable Dr Chalmers, now no more, and his family £1200! And yet, Dr Simpson says, "it is claimed by other parties" than they who have done so much for it. St David's, Kirkintilloch, has been in their possession more than three years,―very nearly four. There is just another remark or two which I have to make upon this document, and I must crave leave to refer to two cases mentioned by me in another place. The first statement is as follows :-" At Kingston, in the parish of Govan, where the church was not recovered till 1845, the congregation at its re-opening numbered 90, and the communicants 45; whereas, at present, the congregation exceeds 550, and the communicants 195, being, in point o fact, treble the number, both as regards congregation and communicants, that a

tended this place of worship previous to the secession." Well, then, in regard to this statement I have to say, that to characterise it would require the use of language not very pleasant in this polite age. Because, first, it is utterly impossible that they could know these facts, for this reason, that the seat-letting book, and the Session book, and roll of communicants, were in the hands of one of my elders, and were never submitted to them. And though they had hit upon the facts by chance, it would not alter the case. But, second, what are the facts as taken from the seatletting book and communion roll, to which I have referred ? I shall read the numbers in each year from the first communion dispensed in Kingston Church down to the year of the Disruption. The first communion was dispensed in 1839; the Church was only opened in the June of that year; it was built expressly for me, and without any request from the inhabitants of the district to have a church planted there. I was sent alone to an empty church, and at the first communion there were 113 who actually communicated; in 1840, there were 222; in 1841, 271; in 1842, 270. Of course, you know that the question which led to the Disruption had now been agitated, and by 1842 a certain proportion were blown off. The number of sittings actually let at the same period was 330. The same gentleman has furnished me with the number of the congregation, and, as ascertained for a particular purpose at that time, it was 500. What are we to think of such conduct? Making the communicants 65 at hazard, instead of 270 or 271; and this in a Report to their Assembly? I shall only say that, if they have exaggerated their own numbers as unscrupulously as they have diminished ours, the public will know how to estimate their statistics. (Hear, hear.) Then there is another statement as to our manner of dealing with the Church Building Society's churches. It is said in the Remarks, "Instead of an attempt' being made by the Establishment to seize the whole of the churches, and to turn out all the congregations, the whole of these churches, with the exception of St Matthew's and Greenhead, have been actually seized upon by the adherents of the Free Church, and have all along been used by them." Now, we all know that rent has been regularly paid by the Free Church for these churches since the Disruption, a very high rent indeed; and I may farther say, that a very considerable debt existed upon them, to the extent of between £4000 and £5000, which has been reduced by these rents to somewhere about £1200, thereby benefiting the party who shall gain possession of them. (Hear, hear.) To make such a statement in a Report to a General Assembly, and publish and republish it in every variety of shape to the world, is a species of conduct such as I should not like to characterise as that of any body of honourable men, and still less of a professedly Christian Church; and, besides, they have themselves occupied some of the Society's churches, for which they have never paid a farthing of rent. To be sure they have not been turned to much account. Now, if men are found making such assertions as these to which I have referred, it is high time, for the interests of religion and of the Church of Christ, that we should protest against it and expose it. (Hear, hear.) Dr BEGG said, they were all aware that the memorial which had been referred to was full of the most random statements; and they were all indebted to Mr Gibson for exposing some of them, and to Mr Gray for the care he had bestowed on this business. The Assembly are aware that the pretence on which the people had been robbed, and were attempted to be robbed, of this vast amount of property, was, that the Establishment could not allow the places of worship to be applied to any other Church than the Establishment. Now a case occurred the other day which proved, that whilst this feeling was very strong against the Free Church, it was not so strong against other parties. There was a society in one of the principal towns for building and buying places of worship, and they had purchased an old church. After the Disruption the Establishment claimed it, on the ground that the funds of the society had been collected for, and the church had been bought for, the Established Church. After a slight struggle their friends gave in; and what took place next? Why, that place was sold to the Morrisonians, and sold by the very parties who wrested it from the hands of the Free Church, on the ground that it never could be used for any other than an Establishment purpose. (Hear, hear.) Very many cases of great hardship had occurred in connection with the conduct of the Established Church in these matters. There was a chapel in Scotland not far from Edinburgh, which was relinquished not long after the Disruption, in connection with

which a spire had been built, and a bell hung therein. The spire had been paid for, but the bell had not. By-and-by an account came to one of the members of the Free Church for the bell, with an intimation that he must pay it, he was told he must pay the bell, and at the same time that he could not remove it, because it was a fixture; and in point of fact, the worthy man had to pay £16, and two of his elders an equal sum as the price of the bell after they had left the Church. (Cries of "Shame, shame.") When they had stated their case in London, the Englishmen, and indeed all men, seemed prepared to admit that it was a very great hardship; but many seemed to fear that nothing could be done to obviate the difficulty. The deputation appealed to the very strong measure of the Socinian Chapel Bill, as a case where legislative interference had taken place. But they said there was a distinction adverse to us, the principle established by the bill being simply to fix a right by the occupancy of twenty-five years. The deputation, in reply, said they did not need to establish such a principle as that, as they had the identical men who built the churches alive, and prepared to depone as to their object in building them. The deputation got no very distinct answer to that; but one Member of Parliament stated that it was a great pity that they were not Socinians or Papists—(a laugh) -as they would have had a better chance, for he declared they hated us more than the Socinians and Papists. He (Dr Begg) had no doubt but that that honest man stated a fact. It was certainly a great evil that a multitude of persons in this country should believe that they were plundered, it might be by law, or at least by civil courts; but the impression would go abroad, and the feeling would rankle in the minds of the people of this country, that they had been robbed of their churches without any protest being taken on the part of the respectable laymen of the Established Church. (Cries of "Hear, hear.") It was somewhat remarkable, that what men would not sanction or approve of in the market place, they would sanction and permit in another place; a principle that would not stand the test of the Word of God, or the test of the rules which regulate ordinary society. For his own part, he thought the Committee should be continued, leaving it to their discretion what kind of effort should afterwards be made.

Mr MAKGILL CRICHTON said, I cordially second the motion made by my respected friend Dr Begg. The Church and this house are deeply indebted to him for collecting the materials, and drawing out the admirable paper or memorial in which our case was brought before the Church and before the members of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) I think the Church, however doubtful of ultimate success, ought to be slow in relinquishing a claim so strongly founded on equity. The matter stands just thus. When some leading cases were decided by the Supreme Courts in Ireland against the Socinians, and in favour of the descendants of the original Trinitarian endowers, Conservatives vied with Liberals in rushing to the rescue. Although there was a fatal vice in the title, although the leading cases had already been decided in favour of the Trinitarians,—although the law had been solemnly declared in their favour by the Supreme Civil Courts, a statute was passed in favour of the Socinians, not only altering the law robbing the Trinitarians of their clear and undeniable property, but absolutely quashing the actions which had been raised, and were actually in dependence. (Hear, hear.) Such were the Parliamentary proceedings in favour of the Socinians or heterodox party. The law, as declared by the Supreme Courts, is set aside, and a new law upon the ground of a bastard equity is established. In the case of the Free Church of Scotland, where the original title, as well as the equity and entire justice of the case are on all hands admitted to be in her favour, yet upon the ground of the technicalities of law being against her, all parties seem prepared to resist even the introduction into the House of Commons of a bill to adjust the important question at issue. Mr Andrew Rutherfurd, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, and represented by Dr Candlish as one of the best friends of the Free Church, rose in his place in the House of Commons and announced his determination to resist even the introduction of a bill to settle the question upon terms equitable to all parties. Such a course was unworthy of a Scotchman, and of a friend of religious liberty; and I desire in my own name, and I believe this house will bear me out in using the name of the Free Church in handing him over to Dr Candlish as his friend, but as no friend to the Free Church, or to the most plain principles of justice. Mode

« السابقةمتابعة »