said, in 1805, with more warmth, and carried with greater difficulty, than ever was known in that body. That it was carried by a very small majority, and continued to be highly disapproved, is evident, from a motion passed in 1806, by a respectable majority, in the following words: "moved that the members appointed to wait on the lord lieutenant be instructed humbly to suggest to his grace, the propriety, the policy and the advantage, of an equalization of his majesty's bounty, comprehending the two congregations which at present receive no bounty." The members above alluded to, as "appointed to wait on the lord lieutenant," were the moderator, the ministers of the presbytery of Dublin, Mr.-now doctor-Black, and Mr. Thomas Henry. For what reason I know not, the appointment of "the ministers of Dublin and dr. Black, was retracted, and others nominated in their place. Against the instructions given to these gentlemen, twenty nine entered their protest. Hence a presumption arises, that they had been, from the beginning, patrons and promoters of the system. Nor is this presumption weakened by a curious fact, This is, that of eight members, who protested against retracting the appointment of the Dublin ministers, as part of an embassy, to suggest to his excellency, the propriety, policy, and advantages, of equalizing the R. D. these very Dublin ministers, dr. McDowell and the rev. James Horner, were two. Whether these same ministers, or one of them, in company with dr. Black, anticipated the approach of the commissioners, by whom they were superseded, to the ear or other organs of vice royalty, they can best tell. To them therefore, I refer my readers. But, be that as it may, the commissioners, in reporting their embassy, make no mention of their gracious reception at the castle, or the attention paid to their suggestions. That report is very concise, and suggests some instruction. "Dr. William Neilson, the late moderator, read a report of the manner in which he and his fellow commissioners, appointed to wait on the lord lieutenant, had executed their commission; upon which it was moved and unanimously agreed to, that thanks be returned to the commissioners for the faithful manner in which they had executed their commission. Thanks were returned from the chair accordingly. Dr. Neilson read also the lord lieutenant's answer to our address of last year, likewise a letter from Mr. secretary Elliot, in answer to the application of the synod for an equalization of his majesty's bounty, which were ordered to be inserted in the minutes, and are as follows. LORD LIEUTENANT'S ANSWER. The ministers and elders of the general synad of Ulster are entitled to my best thanks, for the cordiality with which they express their satisfaction at my appointment to the government of this part of the united kingdom. I can assure them that it shall ever be the most important object of my administration, as it is the most anxious wish of my heart, to secure to every class and description of his majesty's subjects in Ireland, all the blessings connected with civil and religious liberty: and it will give me sincere pleasure to convey to our most gracious sovereign the assurances contained in the address now presented to me, of gratitude for his paternal care, and loyal attachment to his sacred person and government, SIR, THE SECRETARY'S ANSWER. Dublin Castle 26th. July, 1806. His grace, the lord lieutenant, having given the most mature deliberation to the suggestions which you were deputed to communicate to him, in respect to the arrangement of the regium donum, and having also taken the sentiments of his majesty's confidential servants on the subject, I am commanded to acquaint you, for the information of the respectable persons who compose the presbyterian synod of Ulster, that that it is not judged advisable to recommend to his majesty any alteration in the mode at present adopted in the distribution of that fund. I have the honor to be sir, your most obedient, humble servant, THE REV. DR. NEILSON, Dundalk. W. ELLIOT." These two documents are of some importance, as they go to establish two facts. 1. That his grace of Bedford, as representative of majesty, pledges himself to secure the "blessings of civil and religious liberty to every class and description of his majesty's subjects in Ireland." Of this I shall only observe that were this pledge redeemed by securing these blessings to the Irish people, Ireland would be a land of peace and joy, the union with Britain less irksome, and the British isles invulnerable by an enemy. 2. That the continuance of classification, though pronounced by the synod, in 1806, improper, impolitic, and disadvantageons," was persevered in, not by his majesty's command, but on the opinion of his majesty's confidential fidential servants, that it was not advisable to recommend to his majesty any alteration in the mode of distributing the regium donum, then adopted." pre This sketch I have here inserted, though some may think it out of place, to shew that the sent mode of distributing the royal bounty was, not only disagreeable to, but opposed by, a numerous and respectable portion of the ministers of the synod. Whether merit or demerit may attach to its promoters and advocates, it is but justice to them and the synod, that their names should be made known, as far as may be done with correctness. To this end, the protest of 1806 against instructing the members, appointed to wait on the lord lieutenant, to suggest to his grace the propriety &c. of an equalization of his majesty's bounty, is the only guide of which I know, which may be depended on; and their names are as follow: Ben. M'Dowel, D. D. Samuel Barber, John Thom, Andrew Craig, George Hay, William Moreland, Hugh Brooke, Joseph Osborne, John Whiteside, William Hamilton, James Horner, William Ramsay, Robert Orr, William Dunlop, Henry Elder, Henry Simson, Benjamin Mitchel, That |