river, sometimes in the loch; but never to be found twice in the same place. Mr. C. might state ideas in Dr. Burns' hearing; but being shaken and driven out of them, the next time he went into the pulpit he renounced them. His system has been always changing. You will find the witnesses deponing sometimes one thing, sometimes another. You hear one witness swearing, that faith is communion with God the knowledge of a moral truth

the knowledge of that truth that puts you into the image of God-that gives you fellowship and enjoyment with God. And when it was asked Mr. Hawkins, by what power a man believed the Gospel?-he said, no man would believe in Christ but by the power of the Holy Ghost; but that this is the condemnation of man, since there was no physical impossibility in a man's believing one testimony, who could believe another testimony; and that believing the testimony of man, he will not believe the testimony of God, which is greater. There is a quantity of evidence all bringing out this, that faith is nothing more than the belief that Christ has forgiven you. Towards the close of the proof it was repeatedly asked, whether is faith the belief of a historical fact, or a moral truth; and then we get out the distinction, that it had something moral in its nature, and practical in its tendency. There are other things on which I need not dwell. The definition, in one place, of a Christian, is—a man that is rejoicing in God; the definition, in another place, is that he is a man who believes in the record God has given of his Son. Thus, I am perfectly satisfied of the truth of every statement of Dr. Burns' deposition, and I am under correction, if the deposition of a single witness is not perfectly sufficient to establish a charge-especially if there are a number of charges all bearing upon the same thing.

After some farther observations on the evidence, and also on the printed Notes of Mr. Campbell's Sermons, he concluded thus:-I am sorry to come to this conclusion, for I know that Mr. C. might have been a most useful pastor, and I am sorry that he has thrown away his powers; and while he thinks that he is in harmony with the Scriptures, he is altogether opposed to them.

Mr. Gregor.

Moderator, I certainly did intend this morning to say a very few words, and I put down two or three notes for my use,

at the time breakfast was getting ready, but I find. I have left them behind me: on this account I shall be less methodical, but probably you may think it no loss that I have left my paper at home. Some may think that, as I did not hear the deposition of all the witnesses-I only heard two of them—some may think that it looks something like presumption in me to pronounce any opinion upon the evidence, as a member of this Court. I once thought so myself, and intended to have been silent; but I saw reason to alter my opinion. Perhaps, at some subsequent period, I might have felt that I had been guilty of a dereliction of duty. My conscience might say, that my motive for declining the discharge of it was of a selfish nature-that it originated in a wish to avoid my share of any ephemeral odium of which we may be the objects. I believe it will only be ephemeral. I wish the public could enter into our private feelings. I never entered upon any one duty with so much reluctance. I have endeavoured to read this proof-I have studied it the best way I could; and have analyzed it, as my reverend fathers, Drs. Hamilton and Graham, appear to have done, and as the learned counsel has done; I marked most minutely and extensively in the pages of the libel, the

page and letter of the printed evidence that referred to the charges, both generally and specially. But I do not mean, at present, to give you even a sample of this analysis. I shall confine myself to a few general remarks on the nature of the printed evidence. I do think it is not very valuable. My opinion of the kind of evidence we have received is not improved-not in the least altered since I pronounced it in the hearing of this courtwhich opinion I now regret that I did not endeavour to have minuted; for I very much doubt that the Supreme Court will find that the Presbytery of Dumbarton have been wasting their time to a great extent. There is not a tythe of what is printed in this paper that is worth the name of evidence: I would have dispensed with the whole of it without feeling the loss. Give me the admission made by the defender, that the pamphlets, entitled Notes of his Sermon, are faithful representations of what he teaches; and that, with his own answers, was quite sufficient for me. I do not think, that either the evidence for the prosecution or defence is at all satisfactory-the sworn evidence I mean. I think, however, that the former is superior, in some respects, ta 2 H * 2

the latter; and I shall just point out to you in what respects I think it superior, simply for the purpose of satisfying you that I know something of the matter. The witnesses for the libellers are particularly specific-they condescend upon dates, and texts, and heads of discourses-nay, in some most important instances, they give you the very words that he used. I find no such minuteness-no such circumstantiality in the exculpatory proof : I find it vague and indefinite. I was never in the custom of disguising my sentiments for fear of offending any man; and I must say, that the depositions of two or three of the witnesses reminded me very much of so many fragments of tent preachings; as if the Presbytery of Dumbarton had been met to hear an account of the witnesses' great extent of information about the Scriptures, and hear them quoted as glibly as any professional man among us all can do; in fact, it struck me as if an attempt was making to convert the members of the court, and not to give them evidence at all. That was my impression, and it is still my impres sion. There was a great deal too of what struck me at the time as very suspicious evidence. I will endeavour to convey my meaning to the court. One gentleman, of whom, by the way, I have a most respectable opinion, he seems a very well educated man; and a man under the influence of religious feeling-when certain questions were put to this gentleman he paused for one, two, or three minutes, repeatedly. Now I know something about the constitution and endowments of the human mind, and also about its operations, and how they are carried on. When I speak from memory, I see the answer, with my mind's eye, instantaneously, or I do not see it; but when I speak from reflection, supposition, or invention, I must be very cautious-extremely cautious. I am far from insinuating that the gentleman was conscious that he was not giving the matter from his own personal knowledge; but it was the impression on my mind that he neither wished to offend his own conscience by saying too much, nor yet to leave unsaid any one thing that would help his friend. It is quite impossible for me to separate this man's private opinion from the matter of his evidence; and I doubt not that the same thing occurred in many other instances. There is another thing that occurred to me respecting the evidence the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecutors seemed as far as I could judge, to have been strictly

impartial-they did not seem to have any leaning either one way or another. I wish I could say the same thing of the witnesses on the other side. It is no matter of calumny that all these gentlemen are my reverend brother's private friends-that they entertain his opinions, and, as far as their influence extends, endeavour to propagate them. I have no doubt they see the difference, in point of efficiency, as their agent, between Mr. C., minister of the parish of Row, and Mr. C., stript of his gown, wandering up and down through the country expounding his principles. We are all, even the most impartial of us, acting every day under the influence of motives of which we are not conscious.

I will not enter more minutely upon the evidence, for reasons that I have already stated. I agree most completely with my reverend fathers, Drs. Grahame and Hamilton. The doctrine of universal atonement and pardon is just as distinctly admitted by Mr. C., at the 15th page of his answers, as it is possible for words to make it; and the other doctrine, that assurance is of the essence of faith and necessary to salvation, is evidently written, as with a sunbeam, in almost every page, both of his answers and the depositions.

Mr. Proudfoot expressed his regret that the opinion which he found himself compelled to entertain, regarding this case, was any thing but the opinion he could, from the bottom of his heart have wished to entertain. He said that the evidence appeared to him so full, distinct, and conclusive, that he felt he had only one duty to discharge as a minister of the Church of Scotland, and a believer in the revealed word of God, and that was to declare, after going fully into the libel and the evidence, that the doctrines charged in the libel were fully proven; and that, with regard to the different counts, he need only say, that he fully agreed with the opinions already expressed by his reverend fathers. He concluded by saying, that while he would willingly turn round and embrace his brother, did he see him what he had hoped to see him,—a labourer in the same vineyard, entertaining the same views, and animated with the same hopes, as himself,— that no tie, however strong, would deter him from declaring fearlessly that the charges, in every iota, were fully and distinctly proven.

Mr. Story.

It will be in the recollection of my reverend fathers, and brethren, that when Mr. C.'s answers were laid upon the table, I then gave it as my opinion that any farther investigation of his peculiar opinions was totally unnecessary. I was, I believe, solitary in my opinion. I was sure, from what I knew of Mr. C.'s opinions, and from what I saw in his answers, that he had given a very open and ingenuous exposition of his theological principles. It was thought, however, necessary to engage in this most laborious investigation of so many days; and the consequence has been the accumulation of an immense mass of evidence; and, after all, it appears that nothing is contained in these statements but what was contained in his answers. At least this

is the opinion of my fathers and brethren who have spoken before me. I certainly am sorry to think that it is necessary for me to allude to some observations made by those who have preceded me, before I examine the evidence which bears on the different counts. I attended most carefully from the beginning to the close of every sederunt of this reverend Presbytery; and my conclusion from the evidence was very different from that of the reverend brother who spoke last. I never did see, upon the whole, so many individuals apparently most conscientiously delivering their evidence on a difficult matter. I mean to apply this, generally, to the witnesses for the prosecution and the defence. It has been confessed by Dr. Hamilton that the doctrines were not understood but by the followers of Mr. C., therefore, those individuals who were giving their testimony could not be supposed always, and at once, to understand what was meant by the questions that were put. This may account for the delay of 'some of the witnesses in giving their answers; while there is nothing that can, in the least, impeach their conscientiousness and veracity. But without making any other observations, in reference to what has passed, I feel that, as a judge in this Court, I cannot but come to a different conclusion from those who have preceded me.

Mr. Story then went over the different counts in the libel, and, at considerable length, examined the evidence adduced in proof of them.

He remarked, with regard to the second and fourth counts,