prized, because it affords facilities and re- pandering to popular tastes. The demamoves hindrances in the discovery of gogue will supplant the statesman-the truth; the supreme power is truth, and not representative be replaced with a tool. man; God, not the creature. These untoward tendencies should be Now whatever representations diminish checked in their very beginning: and the the authority of the Divine law as the su- most effectual method of doing so, is that preme rule, and make the State the crea- each and every educated man should feel ture and organ of popular will, as if an ab- the responsibility upon him of contributing solute sovereignty were vested in that, are to the moral and intellectual improvement equally repugnant to religion and the true of the masses around him. We are all conception of our government. An abso- brethren, and as members of the same lute democracy is the worst of all govern- commonwealth should aim at the culture ments, because it is judicially cursed as of the whole community. No man liveth treason against God, and is given over to to himself; no man dieth to himself. Let blindness of impulse and passion. I am every one who is blessed with influence, afraid that in this matter we have trodden position, and power, use these advantages upon the verge of error-we have forgotten in bringing all classes to that point of moral that the State is ordained of God, and that elevation in which the ballot box becomes our relations to each other are those of mu- the exponent of worth, and office the badge tual consultation and advice, while all are of merit. What a blessed consummation ! absolutely subject to Him. We may never see it realized, but we may In proportion as we lose the true concep- see it approximated. The approximation tion of the State, we fall short of realizing must be made by the influence of the rich in ourselves that perfection of development upon the poor, the intelligent upon the igand happiness which it was instituted to norant. Each man may do much, and it achieve. Hence, it is not unusual that as would be a glorious result of this day's extremes meet, those who in theory clothe services, if each should resolve that what the people with the prerogatives of God, he can do, whether much or little, shall practically degrade them below the level of be honestly and faithfully done among his intellectual existence. When we cease to own constituents." regard the State as a great instrument of moral education, it is not surprising that THE NEW-SCHOOL'S SECOND APPEAL UNTO the education itself should be disregarded, CESAR.-In an article on the GREAT Genand these Gods be left to demonstrate that eral Assembly of 1854, (Critic No. 1, p. 35,) after all, they are but men. we called attention to the singularly "hap Let it be once conceded that goverment py arrangement" of the property and sucis but an organ of the popular will, cession question of that Body :-First dethe business of the statesman is very sim- claring the Old (School) Charter of 1799 ple-it is only to find out what the people all that is needful to them-and then inwish; and as all courts are attractive by structing the Trustees of their Church the patronage they bestow, we may expect Erection, and Publication Boards, each to to see a system in operation, whose only obtain a charter with general provision, autendency is to secure personal popularity. thorising them to hold property for the The ambition of Legislators and Senators Assembly. Accordingly application has will be directed to the gaining of popular just been made to the Legislature of Pennfavor, and whatever arts promise to be most sylvania for the Publication Board's Charsuccessful, will be held legitimate, as they ter. We have no space now for the discusare the customs and usages of the Court, sion of this question, but the history of the whose seal of approbation is desired. The affair is in itself so curious, so illustrative consequences must be disastrous to all the of the modesty and saintly delicacy of New parties concerned. There will and must be Schoolism, and so likely to be one of the corruption and bribery. There will and points in the controversy, that we think it must be unbecoming condescensions. The worth while to collect and print here, in aspirants for distinction, however they may convenient, form for reference, the facts as abhor these practices, and reproach them- we gather them from the public political selves in stooping to them, feel compelled to Journals and reports of the Legislative proresort to them as the conditions of success, ceedings. and it will always happen that where people are deified in theory, they will be degraded Early in April, a bill was presented in and corrupted in practice. Men will be the Senate of Pennsylvania, "to Incorpopromoted, not according to their wisdom rate the Presbyterian Publication House." and worth; not according to their ability No objection being made, it was passed, and to answer the ends of the State in eliciting sent to the other branch of the Legislature the voice of reason and truth, and securing for concurrence. On the 13th ulto., the the reign of universal justice-they will be bill was called up in the House, and the folpromoted according to their pliancy in lowing proceedings were had :— Mr. M'Clean moved to postpone the bill alleged about the rights and privileges they for the present, and recommended it to the hold under the "Old Charter;" and word early action of the next Legislature. was soon communicated to Harrisburg, The motion of Mr. M'Clean was not agreed that the provisions of the bill passed, would to, as follows:-Yeas 42, nays 45. not be accepted, under the title contained Mr. Donaldson moved to amend in the in it. Their united wisdom suggested first section by inserting the word "Con- another title however, which, whilst it was stitutional" before the word Presbyterian. acceptable to them, they conceived would The amendment was discussed by Messrs. not interfere with rights vested elsewhere. M'Combs, Donaldson, M'Clean, Foust, Dun- Three days subsequently, Mr. Ball read ning, Simpson and Frailey, when in place, in the House, a bill "to incorpo Mr. Donaldson withdrew his amendment. rate the Trustees of the Presbyterian House," Mr. Thompson then moved to amend the which was passed finally. On the same first section by changing the name of the day it was passed by the Senate, and being corporation to the "Presbyterian Book and signed by the Governor, became a law. Tract Publication House," which was not agreed to, as follows:-Yeas 40, nays 45. The following correspondence of one of Mr. Kirkpatrick moved to amend the title our secular papers is an interesting addiby inserting the word "American" before tion to this record :Presbyterian; which was not agreed to, as follows:-Yeas 19, nays 56. HARRISBURG, April, 14, 1855. The contest in the House of RepresentaThe question recurring on the adoption of the section, it was discussed by Messrs. tives on the bill to incorporate the "PresM'Combs and Foust until the hour of one, byterian Publication House," was long and when the House adjourned. animated. It passed through the Senate without a word of observation, attention AFTERNOON SESSION.-The House resum- at the time not being attracted to the name ed the consideration of the bill, to incorpo- which this corporation desired to assume. rate the Presbyterian Publication House, But after it had passed, and was deemed by the question pending being on the first sec- the Presbyterian Board of Publication as an essential usurpation of their name, which The subject was discussed by Messrs. would be productive of litigation and endFoust, North and Frailey, when the first less confusion, the attention of the whole section of the bill was negatived, as fol- Presbyterian community was drawn to it, lows:-Yeas 32, nays 44. tion. Messrs. Smith, (Philadelphia city,) and Ball, moved that the vote just taken be reconsidered, and Mr. Smith further moved to postpone the question of re-consideration. and the influences of both branches of the church exerted, both for and against its * * The course pursued by the party demanding this alteration was neither intolerant or proscriptive; on the contrary, they have The motion was debated by Messrs. North, manifested the kindest and most cautious M'Combs, Ball and Carlisle, and was post-feelings throughout the whole controversy, poned for the present, as follows:-Yeas both in the memorials presented and on the 54, nays 21. floor of the House. By the friends of the Mr. Chamberlin stated that the friends of bill, they were met with charges of sectathe bill were willing to accept of the amend-rian intolerance, instead of valid argument offered by Mr. Donaldson, this morn-ments, until the impression gained ground ing, altering the title of the bill to "Consti- that there was some prospective advantage tutional Presbyterian Publication House, to be gained from this near assimilation to in view of its probable defeat without such the title of the publication house of the Old alteration. School Branch. They had a right to deOn motion of Mr. M'Combs, the vote by mand that no other denomination should which the first section was negatived, was be permitted to build upon the foundation re-considered, and the bill being again be- which they have laid. It is rather singufore the House, lar, in view of the facts that a large sum of Mr. Donaldson moved to amend by alter-money is expended annually in Philadel ing the title to "Constitutional Presby-phia by this board of Publication, and that terian Publication House," which was a large majority of the Presbyterians of agreed to, and the bill as amended was Philadelphia are attached to this branch of passed finally. the church, that but one member from PhilThe next day the Senate concurred in the adelphia voted to protect their interests. House amendments, the bill was signed by the Governor, and became a law. M. This action of the Legislature, it was manThe foregoing letter elicited the followifest, if concurred in by the Trustees of this ing reply from a "New School "-man, new Incorporation, was a virtual and ef- which we publish to show the view their fectual retraction of all that had ever been own body have of the matter: Editorial Exchange. [May, The Opposition of the Old School Presbyte-men, that at this particular juncture, you At a meeting of the General Assembly, pose, in Mr. Barnes' church, May, 1854, an offer was made by John A. Brown, Esq., and other gentlemen of Philadelphia, to present to the denomination, the large and beautiful correspondent, who, by the way is known house opposite the U. S. Mint, for purposes to be unconnected with the Presbyterian of publication. After a hard struggle with Church. New York, the offer was accepted; trustees were appointed, and directed to procure from the Legislature of Pennsylvania a type of "John Hampden" so warmly escharter for "The Presbyterian Publication pousing the cause of the New School PresI am astonished to find a fancied protoHarrisburg, April 18, 1855. House." But, at once, the Old Schcool byterian Church; and still more astonished "Board of Publication" took the alarm. to find any person calling himself a PresbyLetters, memorials, agents, and every in- terian and Christian, attempting to use the fluence, city and State, that could be American feeling of the day to the prejubrought to bear upon the Legislature, was dice of Scotch and Irish Presbyterians, resorted to, as "M." admits, "against the when at least four-fifths of the Presbytepassage of the bill." (6 "had a right," says he, to demand that their parentage from these countries. M. They" (Old School) rian Church of America are proud to own no other denomination should be permitted to build upon the foundation that they had laid." That is to say, First, that the Old School are THE Presbyterian Church! and, Se- Old and New School branches of the PresHarrisburg, April 21, 1855. condly, that "the New School," (as they byterian Church, in relation to the title of The difficulties which existed between the are called by their enemies) are another de- the new publication house, have been amiNow, Messrs. Editors, I bear the name, constitutional" was a distasteful prefix and the blood of one of the old Presbyterian to the party desiring this act of incorporacably and happily adjusted. The word Fathers of the Church, that prepared the tion. So, after conference with the Old constitution, boils in my veins with utter School branch, the simple title of "Presindignation as I read such a statement as byterian House" was agreed upon, as sufthis of your correspondent. The forcible ficiently distinctive from the Presbyteseizure and possession of the books and rian Board of Publication," and more acfunds of the Church may constitute nine points of the law, but we have still justice The fact that the Old School interest, which left for the tenth. So, at least Judge Rogers has the power to prevent any change in the ceptable to the friends of the New branch. charged, and a Pennsylvania Jury decided bill as it passed, were willing to accommoin 1838. So we hope the Court and Jury date their New School brethren by giving will one day decide again. Whatever your them a title more acceptable, is another evicorrespondent "M." may think of this dence that they never desired to throw any matter, be it "known unto all men by obstacle in the way of this charter, but these presents,' CHARTER of the Presbyterian Church as the porate name inviolate. This act is a suf," that we still claim the OLD merely wished to maintain their own corlawful possessors. We claim it by the regu- ficient answer to the charges of sectarian lar succession of the constitution. We shall interference to prevent the granting of this only give up the name of "Presbyterian" charter. A bill was immediately introwhen we give up life. Our opponents are duced to effect this alteration, and passed indeed willing to accord us the name of unanimously through both branches of the "Constitutional Presbyterians," but we do not thank them for the name, when we already have the thing. Legislature. nomination!! M. As to "M.'s" remarks about the relative terian Banner,' and our record is complete : One item more, taken from the 'Presbyproportion of the two branches of the Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, I would when "JOHN HAMPDEN" had prepared his "We should like to know whether or not, only say, that like his "Majority," it is en- phillippic against the Scotch Irish, he showtirely too small to be worthy of notice. Take ed it to John A. 'Brown, Esq., and asked away from our Old School brethren the him from what part of Ulster he and the Scotch and "Scotch Irish" Churches, that late Mr. Fleming came, as they were so have done all this mischief in this unfortu- munificent in their contributions to purnate controversy, and "M." will find that chase the House for the New School body. there are more" American Presbyterians" Such respect was unquestionably due to among the "New School" in Philadelphia him, and to all the Scotch and Irish who than among the Old. Believing, gentle-gave their money for the enterprise." We have read with great satisfaction, the VIIIth Article in The Bibical Repertory, for April, 1855, which is a Review of Bishop McIlvain's work, entitled "The Truth and the Life;" and which contains an explicit and in some respects-very satisfactory statement of the Theology of Princeton, on the "Church Question.' The Review admits, and acknowledges to have been much pained, that its former articles on this subject, had been misunderstood. We are of the number of those, who have often had occasion to dissent from certain theories of Princeton, on the subject of the Church; while, strangely enough we admit, we have had occasion, about as often, to give our cordial assent, to certain other theories of Princeton, on the same general subject. Perhaps it would be more just, in both instances to say, parts of theories;-for we are not always able to see how all the doctrines from time to time enunciated on the subject of the Church, in that able periodical, are capable of being made to harmonize in a single theory; and yet the work is understood to aim at a unity of utterance on all subjects. Comparing the above cited article, with a kind of supplement to it furnished to the Presbyterian of April 21st, by the Rev. Dr. Henry A. Boardman, over his own signature, as from "the Editor of the Princeton Review," we find ourselves, once more, in the predicament in which, as before stated, we have more than once found ourselves heretofore. We agree with the greater part of the article in the Repertory, as not only clear, but true; while we object to the supplement furnished by Dr. Boardman, and to certain parts of the article too, as insufficient and inaccurate. As the shortest and fairest method of presenting the subject, we append the statement objected to, and by its side, one which we judge to contain the fundamental truth. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. Editor Princeton Review, through Dr. The Church Question-Jure Divino. Boardman. 1. The entire government of the Church "The most important of the principles is in the hands of Office-bearers-whose ofthus enjoined in Scripture are the follow-fice is ordained of God: whose selection is ing: of him,-their vocation by his people, and 1. The right of the people to take part their ordination, by a church court. in the government of the Church. Hence 2. The government is in their hands, the divine right of the office of Ruling El-not severally, but jointly, and by Tribunals. ders, who appear in all church courts as It is a commonwealth administered by representatives of the people. courts composed of Presbyters, of two clas"2. The appointment of Presbyters as ses,-one class to Rule and Teach, the othministers of the word and sacraments, with er only to Rule. authority to rule, teach and ordain, as the 3. The whole church is one. There is in highest permanent officers of the Church. every Tribunal, all that can be in any TriHence the divine right of the ministry as bunal. The power of the whole, is over an office, in opposition to the doctrine of the power of every part. the Quakers, and others. And hence the 4. The power of the Ministers to preach parity of the clergy in opposition to the and to administer sacraments, is a several doctrine of prelatists. power, belonging to each of them, ex or"3. The unity of the Church; or the sub-dine, and is wholly independent of their jection of a smaller to a larger part, and of power of government. Their power to rule a larger part to the whole. Hence the and ordain is a joint power, ex potestate, right of appeal, and the right of review and is wholly independent of their power and control. And the authority of church to preach and administer sacraments. courts, whether Presbyterial, Synodical, or 5. The only form in which the power, general, in opposition to all the forms of invested by God in the body of his people, Independency and Congregationalism." but to be administered solely by officebearers, ever appears, is in the vocation of all those office-bearers, always elected by them. Immediately, in the first vocation of each one; sometimes immediately, sometimes mediately through other office-bearers, in all subsequent vocations of them. Without which vocation, by God's people, the foundation of the Christian Commonwealth is subverted. The careful comparison of these two statements, will satisfy any one who understands the subject, and reflects seriously, that the principles on which they respectively rest, and the results to which they respectively lead, are very far from being identical; and that the difference, in both cases, is any thing but immaterial. Touching the Princeton statement, we offer a few brief suggestions. As to the first paragrapgh of that statement; we deny that the people can take any part in the government of the Church, except by means of the election of all office bearers. But this divine and precious right, so often and so utterly taken from them by the money power, by ordinations sine titulo, and the like,-would, if sacredly guarded, put the ultimate control of the Church, where God has put the ultimate church power,-wholly in their hands. We deny, again, that the divine right of the office of Ruling Elder, rests on any such fallacious ground as that intimated in the statement.-And we assert, that as to representation, he who represents in any church court, nothing but his office, is in the court, in utter derogation of the principles of Presbyterianism, and is there on the principles of Prelacy; whether he be a Minister or a Ruling Elder. |