to a humble request, and a liberty clogged with provisions; and we ask, Is there anything approaching to spiritual independence in such circumstances? Under the worst forms of slavery, it has always been judged lawful to present a request, and under certain conditions the master might give a favourable response to his slave; and what better is it in the concession of the Home Secretary? The impression abroad in the district is also to the effect that Mr. Gunn has received this appointment because he is a supporter of the present Government. In the contest at the last general election for the representation in Parliament of the Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities, Mr. Gunn was one of the few parish ministers who voted for Lord Moncreiff; and here, it is alleged, is his reward. The bribe may not, as at Bridgewater, take the form of five or ten pounds, but it is not the less offensive to the public when it comes in the shape of promotion to a richer benefice.

What the issue may be, we cannot say; but if Mr. Gunn is prepared to stand by his presentation, we do not well see how the church courts can set him aside under Lord Aberdeen's Act. For some years past the decision in such cases has depended very much on the humour of the General Assembly; and it is possible that, from the craving for popularity in these times, Mr. Gunn may, like Jonah, be thrown overboard, in order to quiet, if possible, the storm that is already raging.

DR. TEMPLE AND THE SEE OF EXETER.

As we anticipated last month, the opposition to Dr. Temple's elevation to the episcopal office has ended in smoke. Notwithstanding the outcry raised against him by the Evangelicals and Tractarians, the Dean and Chapter of Exeter have obeyed the royal behest, and elected the Broad Churchman to be Bishop of Exeter. It now remains to be seen whether his opponents are prepared to carry out their threats, by joining in the agitation against all church establishments.

In a letter addressed to the Guardian, Dr. Pusey wrote in the following terms:'Honoured by posterity will be the memory of that chapter and of those bishops who first refuse such an injunction. He who has meditated this outrage on the faith of Christians himself holds that faith. "If these things are done in a green tree, what will be done in the dry?" It is time for all who love the faith as it is in Jesus, to think whether we had not better give up any temporalities, or any spiritual advantages which accompany them, rather than risk any repetition of such an infliction. To myself the only hope of safety for the ship seems to be, as in that which bare St. Paul, to "lighten it with our own hands." It still has One in it, we trust, greater than St. Paul, if we, by our sin or indifference, do not drive Him to leave us. But indifference to such a scandal seems to me a grievous sin. Disestablishment appears to me now our only remedy. For it is inconceivable that politicians, in the zenith of their power, will relax in the least their grasp over the church, or that, if they were inclined to do so, their supporters, who (to use their own words) hold it important to "keep the church insignificant," would allow it. Better to face at once what must come in ten years at latest; better to be bared of all external help, if need be, now, than when paralyzed.'

Archdeacon Denison, in a memorial to the Dean and Chapter of Exeter, also declared that, if Dr. Temple be elected, ‘a direct and intolerable offence and treason will have been committed against Christ and his church, and it will become the duty of every Churchman to labour actively and steadily to dissolve all connection between church and state.'

The Rev. Dr. Clarke, of Southport, wrote to the Standard, saying: 'We have arrived at a grave crisis. Dr. Temple's appointment, if carried out, will hold up to public scorn the present system of nomination to the highest offices of the church. The Establishment is menaced. Those who love the union of church and state most dearly will say, Let that union perish rather than that such scandals should be perpetrated.'

After these explicit and public statements, we will be grievously disappointed if we do not find Dr. Pusey and his friends giving in their adherence to the Liberation Society; and if no step be taken by them in that direction, they need not

be surprised to find the public coming to the conclusion that, notwithstanding all their outcry, they are prepared to sell the birthright for the mess of pottage.

NATIONAL EDUCATION.

SINCE our last issue there have been sundry utterances on the vexed question of national education. The 'National Education Union' has held a two-days' conference at Manchester, and passed resolutions in favour of a denominational system. The meeting consisted largely of the clerical element; and the resolutions were in the following terms: That this congress desires to express its general approval of he scheme of the "National Education Union," and is of opinion that it ought to form the basis of further legislation for the comprehensive extension and completion of our national system of education.' That this congress earnestly invites the friends of denominational education to enrol themselves members of the Union, to meet together in their respective localities, and form themselves into auxiliaries for united action, and to sustain the Central Executive during the coming year, by subscribing to the Guarantee Fund, now so liberally opened; and to invite the clergy and ministers of religion to use their influence in this behalf.' The Roman Catholics have also met in great numbers at Birmingham, under the auspices of their bishop, and declared their adherence to the denominational system.

A second meeting of the officers of the National Education League' has been held at Birmingham, when it was announced that the total amount of subscriptions promised up to this time is £20,915. It was further intimated that numerous influential additions had been made to the League, and that branch associations had been formed in several towns both in England and Scotland. Under these two associations the parties in England are now rallying themselves; the Dissenters, with a few exceptions, being found in favour of the League, and Churchmen, including Roman Catholics, in favour of the Union.

Mr. Armitstead, one of the members of Parliament for Dundee, has declared himself in favour of a national system of education, unsectarian, compulsory, and secular. Addressing his constituents on this subject, he says: We should certainly have liked, if possible, to have seen children of all sects meeting together in one school, and being taught religious knowledge on the basis of our authorized version of the Scriptures. But if this cannot be,—and let me here say that the experience of last session has convinced me that it really cannot be,-then let us by all means establish common schools for reading, writing, and arithmetic, and let us trust to the religious feeling of our people for continuing to do what they are at present doing, viz. teaching voluntarily the great truths of Christianity, not only to the children of their own denominations, but to all the outcast and destitute youthful population of our great towns. By doing this, we are not putting religion aside, —we are not placing it in a worse position than at present,-we are not teaching children irreligion or infidelity by teaching them that a-b sounds ab, and 2 and 2 make 4. Nay, we are so far helping religion by insisting that every child shall be compelled to learn to read.' Commenting on this address, the Dundee Advertiser says:No doubt Mr. Armitstead is right. The general feeling of the country is unquestionably in favour of religious instruction being given in our elementary schools; but then the Episcopalians will not hear of it, the Roman Catholics will not hear of it, and the Voluntaries (as a rule) will not hear of it. Insist on teaching religion in the national schools, therefore, and these parties will have nothing to do with them. But without their co-operation a national system of education is utterly impossible. What then? Are we to leave the youth of the country to grow up in ignorance because we cannot get the sects to agree on the religious question? Certainly not. Let us leave the teaching of religion to religious people and churches," says Mr. Armitstead, "and let us have a national system of education, unsectarian, compulsory, and secular."

At a meeting of the Commission of the Free Church, held on the 17th proximo, the committee on national education gave in their report. On the religious difficulty the report contains a most important statement, which we feel constrained to lay before our readers :-' We endeavoured,' the report says, 'but without success,

to have words introduced into the preamble of the bill recognising the religious teaching, according to use and wont, in the parochial schools. On two accounts we cannot advise a renewed struggle for the insertion of these words. First, it was the common objection with which we were met in London, that we declined to press for an enactment on the subject of religious teaching, yet that a preamble without an enactment was worthless-nay, that it was a solecism or a blot in the drawing of a bill to which the Legislature would not consent. And, secondly, men who were not unwilling to assist us in procuring the insertion of these words in the preamble would really have made that preamble the basis of legislation in favour of grants to denominational schools, such as would be quite inconsistent with a really national system of education for Scotland, and quite opposed to views entertained by the Free Church; and thus they would have made us pay dearly for the insertion of these words in the preamble by insisting per contra on a denominational clause vastly more indefinite than that which the bill at present contains.'

In the course of the discussion which followed the reading of this report, and which was bitter and personal beyond measure, Mr. Kidston reiterated the statement, that if it had not been for the United Presbyterians, a clause recognising the teaching of religion would have been inserted in the bill, and in a most offensive manner he insinuated that United Presbyterians are opposed to religious teaching in schools. Now, in the sense in which Dr. Rainy explained, we admit the truth of this-nay, we glory in it. For the last twenty years the Synod has declared that it is not within the province of the civil magistrate to teach religion in schools, and at the last meeting of the Synod the Education Bill introduced by the Duke of Argyll was approved of, on this ground among others, because the question of religious teaching was left to be regulated by the managers of the school. To infer that because United Presbyterians are opposed to religious teaching by state authority, therefore they are opposed to all religious instruction in schools, is not more illogical than to conclude, that because voluntaries are opposed to compulsory payments for the support of religion, they are therefore opposed to all payments for this important object. There are ministers and members, we believe, in the United Presbyterian Church, as there are in the Free Church, who are ready to homologate Mr. Armitstead's views,-not because they think lightly of religious instruction, but because of the supreme importance that they attach to this matter: and should the controversy reach this point, that we must make our choice between a national system of secular instruction, and a denominational scheme under which all forms of religion would be inculcated, we can have no hesitation in making our choice. The deliverance of the Commission on the report was, that it lie in the meantime on the table.

MISCELLANEOUS.

Union in America.-The Rev. Dr. Buchanan, of Glasgow, has received the following telegram from Pittsburg -The two great Presbyterian churches in America this day united. Greet the Presbyterian churches of Great Britain and Ireland, and pray that they also may be one.' To this prayer we say Amen. The Suez Canal. This immense undertaking, which connects the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, has been inaugurated with great pomp. A fleet of between thirty and forty vessels, headed by the French Imperial yacht Aigle, entered the canal at Port Said, and steamed up to Ismaila. Whatever tends to unite countries and nations is a valuable contribution to civilisation and religion. Dr. Livingstone.-Of this intrepid and Christian traveller we have now reliable intelligence, and we anticipate his early restoration to the civilised world, richly laden with the spoils of Africa. The Pope Repentant.-The Pope has written to the effect, that while such Protestants as Dr. Cumming cannot be admitted to the Ecumenical Council, there will be learned and devout men ready to remove their doubts, and prepare the way for receiving such erring brethren into the bosom of the church. Will the Doctor take advantage of this back door that has been opened for him? For the credit of our common country and faith, we hope not.

PAGE

. 433

. 430

566

INDUCTIONS.-Rev. J. Brown, 424; Rev. J. C.
259
Brown, 184; Rev. J. Buchanan, 283; Rev. J.
Corbett, 324; Rev. M. Crawford, 138; Rev. A.
Curr, 564; Rev. W. Hutton, 521; Rev. J. C.
Jackson, 424; Rev. J. James, 283; Rev. Dr.
King, 234; Rev. H. Miller, 377; Rev. W.
Munsie, 288; Rev. J. Parlane, 138; Rev. W.
Roberts, 564; Rev. W. Thomson, 90.
Ireland, 288; Catholic Archbishops on Educa-
tion on Land Questions, 474, 478; Churches
in, 527.

Irish Disestablishment, 49, 139, 190, 336, 384,
479; Gathering up the Fragments, 426.

Printed by MURRAY AND GIBB, North-East Thistle Street Lane, and Published by
WILLIAM OLIPhant and Co., 7, South Bridge, Edinburgh, on the 1st of December