The Sun.
London, England, 1823-10-21 00:00:00

•f From the Glasprto Courier.}
HIGH CHURCIP—PRINCIPAL AI'FARLANE.
. G LAI G 0 W, MUT, Os;: r. 1.1.;-,abq:SylVd °lair
and Ayr met here this day when, in the absence of the . Jo-
& , rater, the Ilei. Dr: Stirling of Criiigie, who was Pre:rented
front attending by severe domestic affliction, I.,Sermori :was
preached from 2d Timothy,:ehap. e. viii. by thalete
rator, the Ail,. Mr. Muir of Glas,,,QW.
The Synod elected the Wei: 'Dr. Daniel Dewar their Mo-
derator, and, after some routine business, adjourned till 1.0
o'clock to-morrow.
WEDNEBOAY, Ocer. 15.—The Synod met at ten o'clock.
After some Preliminary business had been gone through.ahe
Court agreed to take inteconeideration the itypWotthe,,ll.ea.
Dr. MiFarlane, Principal of the University. of Glasgoreagairlt
the decision of the Presbytery of Glasgew, together with the.
reasons of dissent of the Bev. Dr. Taylor,-Dr. Rankine, Mra
Lapslie, and others, from, the :mid decision.
A Petition WAS, ,Preseated from the $:: ration of St. Mungo'e,
craVing the imMediate Intluitioteetanie`lll`Farline, which,
after considerable discussion, was -rejected on account of in-
formality. .
The necessary papers having been read._ bud parties sum-
moned to the bar of the house, for the appellant, appeared Pa-
trick Robertson, Esq. advocate.
Att. Itouteite•soal wee. He began by expeeseing &conscious-
ness of his inadequacy,' anti a conviction of the ditfictilties
:which he would have to encounter from the array of talent op-
'Posed.to him. ; .He set slide entirely the discussion respecting
the petition front the Session of St. Mungo. That petition
was a document he had pever heard of till he entered the
house. He wished to enter 'upon the consideration of the ques-
tion and dispassionately. It was a question of vital im.
portance both to our national church and to, his Client. He
had his client's authority to say that he imputed to his oppo-
nents no improper motive. He firmly. believed they
:were act-
ing conecientiouslyelutt at the same time had taken an erro-
neous view of the LW. - The 'Synod were bound to Administer
justice freely, ,fairly and impartially. .Its functions were not
legislative, but judicial.- It must look to what the law is, not
to what it ought to be. This ought particularly to be kept in
view. Though the whole 14Ws of the Church werewreng, the
Synod must act on them. The case was short and simple; as
to facts, there was no dispute ; his clitint had long been a
Minister of our Church; his talents were not to be eulogised
by his counsel. There was no dispute as to the right air
patronage being vested in the Crown—no dispute as to the
moral and intellectual qualifications of his client, no dispute
as to his personal ability —the only objection urged against him
was, that tie is Principal of the University of Glisegow. Nirhat
Was the duty- of a Presbytery—it was not their dote, to form
opinions and resolutions on general matters; they ought sim-
plicitei either to have sustained arrejected the presentedon.
The Learned. Counsel then read an Act of Parliament
passed in 1692 ; he contended that the Presbytery of Glasgow
had gone into discussions directly in opposition to the
terms of this etetute—their sentence did not meet the duty
which they were called upon by it to perform. They • had
entered into general Mature on which men will always differ.
They had' -expressed opinions and had framed resolutions
founded en there opinions. They had found that the Parish
of St. Mungo 'ConkiMi=ri population of nearly 9,000 souls,
and that his client, by .being Principal of the. College of
Glasgow, was 'nrable'to'distharge the ministerial duties of.
the parish—thus determining that degree of ability neCessa:.`
ry to be, possessed 'his client, before lie oould become Mi.;
nester of St. What precise abilities such a popu-
lation required he did not know. They had found also, that
the duties of Principal, were great and important—How did
the Presbytery come to a knowledge of this fact? Ile protested
against any discussion on the question of expediency,. that was,
not before them. There had been no evidence laid on the,
table of the Presbytery that his client was Principal of the.
College of Glasgow, bit he would pass from this ground of ap-
for he believed that his clientelid hold the office of Prin.,
beink Principal, hawever, was no disquelification.
—There was no law prohibiting the union of a Ministerial
charge with the .Prlncipalship ; and if there was no such law.
there could be no reason for not inducting. The Learned.
Connect then proceeded to read from tot Act of Parliament,'
passed in 1511.1, chapter 52, and to shew that his client did
not' fall under any of the disqualifications therein alluded:
to, the Act referring only to benefice's having cure. lie
also read extracts from several Acts of Assembly refer-
red to in the sentence, of the Presbytery, anent various
cos.:runtime in the .fives of Ministeri, Which acts directed'
not deposition, but merely admonition and reproof. fie ob-
served, that were the Synod to be guided by these acts, Instead
of refusing the induction of his client, they would'sitinnion him
to the bar of this venerable house,.make him acknoWledge his
crimes, and say to him, " Oh, you sinner, why are you Princi.
pal of, the I Teirersity of' Glasgow." Ws hear much of the good
old times of our Church, of its purity and simplicity, and of the
depravity of the-present age, but these Acts' of AeseMbly give
but it sorry picture of these good old times. The Learned
Counsel then quoted a number ofprecedents to the present case.
fly a charter Of James VI. the Principal of Glasgow College
was required to be Minister of the Parish of Govan, besiJcs
teaching Theology, llebrew and Syriac, alternately, during the
week—but the Presbyteiy will not allow the Principal to be a,
Minister. Andrew Melville waslllinister of °oven, Profesior
of Theology, of Oriental Languages, and Principal of the Col.
lege of Glasgow. The late Principal Taylor held also the of-
fice of Minister of the High Church. Why was not lie
dered disqualified ? But the Presbytery consider it a different
thing to let a than in and' a turn a roan out. So that, accord.
log to the Presbytery, if h.disqoalifted person ;can. but slip in,
he is in no datiger of bring turned out. He (the Counsel)
could not understand this: The only disqualification urged
against his client was, that -lie was Principal of the College
of "Glasgow; Look to the other Colleges. -Such an Union
of offices as he contended for existed. in them. It there is no
Jew against it, his client Must gain--if there be a law in his
favour, he must also again. flier Learned Counsel then re,
&nett to the case of Dr. Hill, and stated the decision of the
Assembly respecting it.. In this case,_ die. Assembly uniude
ti eusly dismiesed the complaint lodged, end ordered the homes
alive induction of 1)r. Hill. They considered it dangerous and
injurious for any Presbytery to call in question the authority of
the decisions of the Supreme Court. The judgmenti of the
General Assembly arc tut binding on the lower Courts as those
oldie House of Lords on the vault of Seesion. "These hewer
Courts are not to be guided by views ofexpediettcy. The Learned
Ceuroiel then referred to the case of King *Malls, and also to art
overture presented to the General Assensly in 1014 by the Synod
of Angus and Mearnia lie then read. the Act of Assembly 11117,
regar&ng 'pluralities. This Act allows nine months for demit-
dng one of the Charges. But the Presbytery, instead of in.
ducting his!client, as the Act plainly requires, and allowing
him nine months to consider which of his charges lie would
dernit, have refused to indUct him at all, .even into a charge
areaealedvaahee lanatwc,hahrgye.doilnige
allowed by the Act. It was • not for the ai/od. of religion for
this, inferior Courta to set themselvecup against the General
Assembly. of the Church. Let . them overturn the General
Assembly, but_ not attempt to
rice to the-party at the bar. It has been meld that the two of..
fires are incompatible, and that there are plenty of 'descrying
clergymen capable of supplying
and specific grounds.
defend his cause on genera The pere
sons who have adorned the Church-hive held auch offices. If
evils do exist in our laws, take constitutional steps to haSe
.
them remedied. Bring in anew law ; for the present you must
act upon the laws which you have. The Minister of the High
Church loss been. said to be a Artmiter• of the College and. en
:to
Auditor of the .Principal's otle
What business have slier
Presbytery with Cite auditing Of the PrhleiPal'a accounts. lie-
sides, these accounts hive not 41w.3).1 becn• audited beehe Abe
nista of the High Church. At last they were audited by'the
The Learned Comte
git this was protested against, his
Rector, Dean of Feculty and the Ittimeter of the High Church,
but afterwmels by ebellinieter of the. iron Church, or by one;
of,oo
ma
te%
of cilasgow. principal Taylor resigned the
office of isitor, and althon
resignation WU sustained by
sel recapitulated, and concluded4Y raeoromePdinti to the spina
to order the immediate mduCtion of his client,
,17 '4,
oie- existing
laws were faulty, let them take ptoper steps to get them
theCallege.
th
rectified, but not act unjustly sinter eir operation.
Dr, TAYLOit hoped that the eentencle of the inferior. Court,
which be considered unjust,. oalleae .4r. d severe, would bail*
day reversed: `'That sentence lulu excited wonder: it aillithed
that .Dr. M `Arlene was an weltialified.presentie. :Dr. IllaPtir.
the Whok
lane woa.diatinguished.throut4h. course 9( his atudieS,
and had been a faitliftil and euccessfol Minister fur 110episseae
Shall it he Said that Di. 1114Farlene ma ungtYalitieci ',bedsit:oe lie
is Prine44.of tbo,oo4ego 9117, -AVlen-eair'Prinolpitht et
111[11 are
hare aJ
present fiord ecelesiasticalollo3%elite /• T T"-W4Ya.4"11
. allowed in our clutra. Vnite P are Phtinlities,