offered to them, that the ruling party would retrace their steps, and pursue, for the future, such measures as should tend to promote the glory of God, and advance the interests of religion.

CHAPTER II.

The four brethren meet at Gairney Bridge-The Associate Presbytery formed -Reasons assigned for its formation-First Testimony published-Summary of its contents Articles of belief published by the presbyteryPopularity of the Seceding ministers-Proceedings of the General Assembly in 1734-Act authorizing the restoration of the four brethren to their charges Remarks on this act of Assembly-Meeting of the synod of Perth and Stirling in July 1734-The sentence pronounced by the Commission against the four brethren reversed-The brethren refuse to return to the national church-Reasons for their refusal-Their conduct vindicatedMeeting of the General Assembly in 1735-The Associate Presbytery agree to proceed to acts of jurisdiction-Applications for sermon made to the presbytery from the parishes of Muckhart and Kinross-Confession of sin made by the brethren of the Presbytery to one another-General Assembly of 1736 Professor Campbell of St. Andrews-Convicted of error-No censure inflicted-Messrs. Wilson and Fisher visit the west of ScotlandIntroduction of the Secession into Ireland-Mr. Wilson elected Professor of Divinity by the Associate Presbytery-Publication of the Judicial Testimony-Attacked by Mr. Currie of Kinglassie-Defended by Mr. WilsonPorteous riot-Captain Porteous hanged by the populace-Seceding ministers accused by the Duke of Argyle of being concerned in this businessPorteous act Condemned by the Seceding ministers.

AFTER the sentence of the Commission had been pronounced against Mr. Erskine and his three friends, loosing the relation betwixt them and their respective congregations, and declaring them no longer ministers of the national church, these brethren agreed, before they left Edinburgh, to hold a meeting for the purpose of deliberating what course they would pursue in the circumstances in which they were now placed. Agreeably to this appointment, they met at Gairney Bridge, in the neighbourhood of Kinross, on the 5th December, 1733. Two other brethren, Messrs. Ralph Erskine and Thomas Mair, met along with them. This was a most solemn and important meeting; and the memorable consequences which have resulted from it, entitle it to hold a high place in the reverential regard of every friend of the Secession. The good men who assembled on this occasion felt the delicacy of the situation in which they were placed; they were also deeply sensible of the importance of the trust reposed in them as ministers of the gospel. The proceedings of the Assembly and of the Commission, in reference to them, had excited an extraordinary interest in the country; and they were well aware, that the eyes of a considerable portion of the pious were directed toward them, to see how they would act in the present emergency. In these circumstances, they avoided every thing that might

have the appearance of rashness or precipitancy. They considered it due to themselves, and to the cause in which they were embarked, to observe the utmost caution. Before taking a single step, they pondered well the necessity of it, and the probable consequences that would result from it. Accordingly, when they met at Gairney Bridge, they did not hastily come to a determination what course they would adopt. They continued in prayer and in serious deliberation for two days; and having thus frequently implored the divine direction, and having maturely weighed all the circumstances of the case, they finally resolved to form themselves into a presbytery, under the designation of The Associate Presbytery. Ebenezer Erskine was requested to constitute them with prayer, when he was afterwards chosen Moderator. Mr. James Fisher, minister at Kinclaven, was appointed clerk, and took the oath de fideli.*

Mr.

The reasons which influenced them in taking this decisive step, were the following: They considered that, by forming themselves into a presbytery, they were following up the design of their protestation before the Commission, in which they declared, that, notwithstanding the sentence which had been pronounced, they were at liberty to exercise the key of discipline and government, and all the functions of the ministerial office. By thus uniting together in collegio, they were acting more in consistency with their professed principles as presbyterians, than if they should act separately, and independently of one another. They farther conceived, that the state of the Established Church was such as to require prompt and efficient measures to be adopted, to give relief to those who, in every part of the country, were groaning under the yoke of patronage: and with the view of granting both effectual and permanent relief to all who might require it, did they form themselves into a presbytery. They did not consider that they had so clear a promise of the Great Head of the church amongst them, until they were constituted in his name. And, finally, there was some danger if they dismissed, on the present occasion, without coming to any final resolution, that they might become disunited amongst themselves, and might not be favoured with another opportunity, equally convenient with the present, of forming themselves into a presbytery.†

* The members of the Associate Presbytery, at its first formation, were Mr. Ebenezer Erskine, minister of Stirling; Mr. William Wilson, minister at Perth; Mr. Alexander Moncrieff, minister at Abernethy; and Mr. James Fisher, minister at Kinclaven. Mr. Ralph Erskine of Dunfermline, and Mr. Thomas Mair of Orwell, though present on this interesting occasion, did not connect themselves with the presbytery till some time afterward.

† Minutes of the Associate Presbytery.

FIRST TESTIMONY PUBLISHED.

73

Such were the reasons that influenced them in associating together in a presbyterial capacity. They agreed, however, that for some time to come their meetings should be held chiefly for prayer and religious conference; and that before. proceeding to any judicial acts, they would wait to see whether a spirit of reformation might not yet pervade the ecclesiastical judicatories, and thus a door be opened for their restoration to the bosom of the national church. Before separating, they appointed Messrs. Wilson and Moncrieff a committee to prepare an extended statement of the reasons of their protestation before the Commission. These brethren executed with great care, and with much ability, the task assigned them; and having presented at a future meeting of presbytery a long and an elaborate statement of the reasons of their secession from the national church, the whole was carefully revised by all the brethren, and was soon after published under the sanction of the Presbytery. It was entitled, "A Testimony to the doctrine, government, and discipline, of the Church of Scotland; or, Reasons by Mr. Ebenezer Erskine, &c. for their protestation before the Commission of the General Assembly, November 1733."

It does not consist with the plan which the writer of this narrative has prescribed to himself in the prosecution of this history, to introduce into its pages the various official publications emitted from time to time by the Secession Church. To do so, would be to load the narrative with a mass of matter, which, however excellent it might be in itself, could not be supposed interesting to the greater part of his readers, and would be apt to deter them from the perusal of this work. To this rule, however, which I have laid down for my guidance, occasional exceptions must occur, otherwise the interests of truth would suffer, and an injury would be inflicted on the memories of the good. The notice which I am now about to take of the first Testimony published by the Fathers of the Secession, forms one of these exceptions. Let none of my readers close this book in disgust at the mentioning of the word Testimony. I am aware that the term is, in the estimation of many, sufficiently vulgar and commonplace, and that there is a danger of their being seized with nausea at the very sight of it; but I know also, that a publication having an unpromising title, may yet be distinguished for the excellence of its contents, and that we are to judge of the value of it from the latter of these, and not from the former. Had the Fathers of the Secession, instead of adopting the plain and familiar word Testimony, dignified their official productions with some high-sounding title, the probability is, that the men of the present day, enlightened and intelligent though

they be, would not have deemed them unworthy of their notice. The province of the historian, however, is not to invent new names for works that have been long in existence; his business is to give a faithful narrative of the past, as well as of present events, calling every thing by its proper name; and seeing that the venerable men, with whom the Secession originated, after having formed themselves into a presbytery, considered it due to themselves, and to the cause in which they were engaged, to publish a defence of their conduct and, of their principles, and gave to their defence, when published, the title of "A Testimony to the doctrine, government, and discipline of the Church of Scotland," &c., it certainly becomes the men of the present generation to give to these intrepid worthies a patient and attentive hearing. The language in which their sentiments are clothed, is occasionally homely and uncouth; but the sentiments themselves are dignified, manly, and scriptural in a high degree; they breathe a spirit of the most ardent devotedness to the cause of God, and to the best interests of the human race. The writer of this work, then, craves no indulgence from his readers, while he presents them with a brief exposition of the statements contained in the first Testimony published by the Associate Presbytery in vindication of their conduct. In giving this exposition, he is influenced chiefly by the following reasons:-1. The conduct of Mr. Erskine, and of those who acted along with him, has been frequently arraigned and condemned, in the strongest terms, by writers who have espoused the opposite side of the question. They have been stigmatized as "popular demagogues," and have been charged with "unreasonable intemperance and pertinacity," in opposing the violent measures of the ruling party in the church; and it is nothing more than an act of common justice to give these men an opportunity of being heard in vindication of themselves, so that the world may judge on what side truth and justice lie. 2. Many have grown up within the Secession, who are, in a great measure, ignorant of the exact grounds which the founders of the Secession occupied, when they withdrew from the national church, and of the principles which they maintained; and it is of importance that these should have stated to them, in the language of the first Seceders themselves, what were the views which they held, and what were the reasons that influenced them in forming themselves into a distinct religious society. 3. I conceive that a history of the Secession Church would be very incomplete, did it not furnish those connected with other denominations, with the means of knowing exactly what were

Moncrieff's Life of Dr. Erskine, Appendix, No. 1. pp. 444, 446.