waters prevailed, and that the hypothesis of Dr. Buckland and others, that the remains of animals found in Kirkdale cave, &c. are the relics of animals once living in its immediate vicinity, is utterly unfounded. It will thus be seen that the conclusions of Mr. Fairholme are entirely contrary to those of Dr. Buckland, Mr. Lyell, and other eminent geologists, while his work contains some very striking instances of the absurd consequences, resulting from the hypotheses which some of these eminent men have adopted.

"With regard, however, to the actual age of the world, and the actually short period during which secondary causes have been in action on the portions of the globe we now inhabit, we may safely refer the subject to the powerful evidence produced in such abundance, and with so much industry, by this author, Mr. Lyell himself. I have had occasion in a note, in another part of this treatise, to notice the startling facts produced by Mr. Lyell, with respect to the quantity of mud daily imported into the sea by the single river, the Ganges: it is there admitted by Mr. Lyell, that even at the lowest estimate, viz. one part in a hundred, of mud, in the waters of that river, there is imported daily into the Bay of Bengal, 'a mass, more than equal in weight and bulk to the great pyramid of Egypt.' It does not suit the theory of Mr. Lyell to admit the correctness of Major Rennell's estimate, in which it is shown, with much clearness, that the daily deposit of that single river, in the flood season, instead of only once, is nearly equal to seVENTY-FOUR times the weight of that gigantic monument. If we even divide the difference between these two authors, and admit the amount to be not more than from thirty to forty times the size of the pyramid per day, and if we extend our view of a similar action to all the rivers of the earth, and then consider the comparative actual extent of the whole mass of secondary formations over the surface of the primitive globe, we shall at once perceive that such violent transporting powers, acting for a million of years, must have produced a mass of secondary formations, infinitely greater than what actually exists upon the earth, which may, probably, be considered as of not greater medium thickness than about one mile. But one million of years is not sufficient for those who advocate the view of the subject adopted by Mr. Lyell; no author of that school has ever yet been able to bound his views within any nameable period; and we may, with much truth, transpose their own animadversion, and consider it as not very wonderful if they find themselves involved in inextricable confusion and difficulty, when they cal culate upon thousands of years instead of hundreds, and millions instead of thousands.'-Pp. 32-34.

LETTERS TO PRESBYTERIANS, on the Present Crisis of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. By Samuel Miller, D. D., Professor of Ecclesiastical History and Church Government in the Theological Seminary at Princeton.

(Continued from page 86.)

We have already said, cursorily, when we had another point chiefly in view, that Voluntary Societies among Presbyterian churches divide and distract us, and that their interference enfeebles our hands and diminishes our resources. These remarks have such an important connexion with this whole subject, that we wish to draw the attention of our readers to them distinctly and specially-as worthy of the most serious consideration. We first ask, can the facts be denied? Not, we think, by those who have been attentive to the course of things in the

Presbyterian church for a few years past, and who will review that course, and consider our present state, with care and candour. What was it that produced the unhappy excitement and conflict, which took place in the General Assembly of 1828, to which we have already referred; and what was it gave rise to a state of feeling and action, still more ardent, contentious, and reproachful, in 1831? Precisely and confessedly, in both instances, it was a contest between the friends of the General Assembly's Board of Missions, and the friends and advocates of the American Home Missionary Society-between an Ecclesiastical Organization on the one side, and a Voluntary Religious Association on the other. This open opposition has, for two years past, been forborne. But has the leaven which produced the violent and visible fermentation, at the periods referred to, ceased to work? Not for a moment, we do verily believe. We would indeed hope, and are willing to admit, that there has been an abatement of exasperated and unkind feelings, in both parties. But as to a change of views, purposes, and favourite objects of pursuit, we do not believe there has been, on either side, any alteration that is worth an estimate. After attentive observation and serious reflection on the subject, we are deeply convinced, that an attachment to the interests and views of Voluntary Associations, have had an influence in almost every question of importance that has come before the Supreme Judicatory of our church, as well as in many of the inferior judicatories, for a period of several years duration; and that this influence is not materially less now, than at any former time. We believe, as heretofore intimated, that frequently it is not recognised, by those who are under its power and guidance. Like other strong propensities of the mind, it has an effect, in numerous instances, in which its operation is not observed by those on whom it acts-It has many latent associations and sympathies, of which those who are moved by them, are little aware. Voluntary Associations, it has already been seen, are the offspring of Congregationalism and Independency, and that, very generally, they carry with them the spirit of their parentage. Hence, their zealous advocates have a kind of family feeling, for every measure in our church that bears Congregational features on its face. On the contrary, for a strict Presbyterianism measure, they have, at first sight, a sort of instinctive dislike-it is alien to their partialities. From this cause it is, that the devoted friends of Voluntary Associations in our ecclesiastical judicatories, (in nearly all of which they are found, and in several are a majority) become the advocates of whatever is lax in government or discipline, and decidedly opposed to whatever is calculated to sustain strict Presbyterianism against their favourite Congregationalism. We do not believe that we greatly err, when we say that from the cause now indicated, more than one-half of all the propositions that have demanded attention in the General Assembly of our church, for the last ten years, have been met, previously to all reasoning, either with friendly or adverse feelings, in the minds of the ardent friends of Voluntary Religious Associations. And as certainly as that any given cause will be followed by its natural and appropriate effect, so certain is it, that distracted and divided counsels, with all their unhappy consequences, will continue in our church, so long as Voluntary Education and Missionary Societies exist and are cherished in it, as they are at present. The principle of action and reaction in philosophy, is completely exemplified in what takes place between Congregationalism and Voluntary Religious Associations-the former originates the latter, and the latter react, to produce and cherish the former. Ch. Adv.-VOL. XII.

R

What is history good for, if it is not to make us wise, by the experience of times that are past? It was in the hope that our church might learn something useful in this way, that we have painfully and carefully reviewed her whole history, since her existence in our country; and have shown, we hope satisfactorily, that from first to last, the admixture of Congregationalism with Presbyterianism, has been the fruitful seed of controversy and discord, in our ecclesiastical counsels and measures. Shall we, with this experience to instruct and warn us, keep up a hotbed for the sowing of this seed of animosity and division, and from which the germs it produces shall be transplanted to mature and bring forth fruit, in every part and portion of our church? Consent to this, whoever may, we never can.

Professor Miller, in his third letter, pleads with earnestness and eloquence, and we doubt not with entirely upright motives, for a cordial cooperation of Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Boards, in promoting missions and education in our church-He thinks that they may and ought to act as sister institutions, sincerely attached to each other, as well as to the immensely important objects which they seek to promote; and that from the operations of this system, unspeakably more good will result than from any other that can be devised. From all this we dissent-1. Because, so far as experience has hitherto gone, it is diametrically opposed to the professor's plan and expectations. All our past experience, has shown, as we have seen, that Ecclesiastical and Voluntary organizations do not work harmoniously together. In our church, for six years past, these sisters, so far from regarding each other with mutual affection and confidence, have felt and acted more like jealous rivals, each regarding the other with suspicion; each willing to get away the other's admirers, and attach them to herself; and each seeking to promote her own influence, not only regardless of the other, but, to say the least, not grieving, if it were at the expense of a diminution of the other's influence. 2. Notwithstanding the professor's wishes, counsels and expectations, we verily believe that the future is likely to resemble the past-that what has been will be—that till Christians have reached much nearer to perfection than the world has yet seen, organized bodies, as well as individuals, who have a common and a very precious object in pursuit, will each be better pleased with its own than with its neighbour's success, and that where patronage is to be sought from the same sources and individuals, there will sometimes be unfair means used to gain that patronage; that this will at least be suspected, and that suspicion, if not real foul dealing, will beget jealousy, rivalship, and alienation. Such is human nature; yes, alas! this is human nature, even among Christians, who are sanctified but in part. A few individuals, we readily admit, are occasionally found, who can live together, and love each other, and rejoice in each other's honour and success, when circumstances make them competitors. But these are always regarded as such rare instances, as to be objects of admiration and wonder. How seldom is it seen that ministers of the gospel, who are co-pastors and colleagues, continue to act with entire mutual confidence and harmony? How often is every thing, the exact opposite of concord, painfully witnessed? The difficulty of sustaining the collegiate charge, at once with personal comfort and to the edification of the people served, has nearly or quite banished such charges from our church; although, but for this, they would, in many cases, be exceedingly desirable. Now, we maintain that it is not less, but far more difficult, for Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Boards,

to pursue missionary enterprises and educational plans, in the same church, with zeal, cordiality and permanent harmony, than it is for two ministerial brethren to serve the same congregation, without jealousy and unhallowed competition. It is manifestly far more prac ticable to find two individuals who shall sustain a delicate and difficult relation to each other, with affection, concord, and cordial co-operation, than to find two numerous bodies of individuals who shall do this-bodies in which there will unavoidably be found some indiscreet persons, whose acts may render the preservation of harmony absolutely impossible. We repeat, then, that we do conscientiously believe that it is far more difficult for Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Organizations to act, side by side, in the same church, and for the promotion of the same objects, and yet avoid jealousy, strife and contention, than it is for two ministers of the gospel to have charge of the same flock, and continue to act with entire affection and uniform concert. 3. Principle itself-the solemn obligation which conscientious men feel to promote the cause of God, in the best and most efficient way in their power, will operate to produce alienation between Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Organizations, when their plans and measures are to be formed and executed in the same church, and among the same people. The friends of each of these corps, unquestionably think that the method they have respectively adopted is the best-their very choice, or act of adoption, proclaims this. And are they never to endeavour to promote a plan for doing good, in the way which each of them believes is preferable to that of the other? Can a Presbyterian minister, who solemnly believes that the great Head of the church has committed to his church, in its distinctive ecclesiastical character, the sacred trust of evangelizing the world, and that the preservation of sound doctrine among those who shall be evangelized, is far more likely to be secured, when missionary operations are conducted by the church, as such, than when managed by Voluntary Associations, that have no acknowledged creed, and may become corrupt by a speedy change of the associates-can a Presbyterian minister, we say, who solemnly believes these truths, forbear to inculcate them? He cannot-and so surely as he does it, he will give umbrage to the friends of Voluntary Associations. Professor M. is an example in point to sustain us here. He has written most ably, as the quotations in our last number show, in maintenance of the very ideas suggested in our last interrogatory. And has he done it withoutlet us choose the mildest term we can select-without displeasing the friends and advocates of Voluntary Associations? We know he has not. The professor has indeed done much to soothe and reconcile them, by pleading for the continuance of their patronage-inconsistently as we think-in the Presbyterian church. But still, we know they do not like his conclusive reasoning, in favour of a better system than the one of their choice-If the powerful arguments of the professor have appeared in a single periodical devoted to the service of Voluntary Associations, it has entirely escaped our observation. We insist, therefore, that men who conscientiously believe that the way in which they are seeking to promote the cause of Christ and the salvation of souls, is more eligible, efficient and successful than any other, are bound to use their endeavours to enlist others to co-operate with them in this way, in preference to any other; and that the doing of this by the friends, respectively, of Voluntary Associations and Ecclesiastical Organizations, both operating in the same church and among

the same people, will produce collision, dissatisfaction and discord.The only way, as far as we can see, for the avoidance of the evil, is, for the parties to take separate fields of action, as we have heretofore stated. Let the Voluntary Associations cease to form and to maintain their affiliated societies in the bosom of the Presbyterian church, and let them operate in fields not preoccupied by the Boards of this church, and then we will bid them God speed, with our whole soul; then we shall have more peace and order among ourselves, and cherish nothing but fraternal feelings and good wishes toward them; we shall view them, as we view other evangelical bodies, that are engaged in missionary and educational enterprises; and all information of their growing influence and increasing success, will gladden our hearts and animate our prayers.

Professor M. expresses his conviction with earnestness, that much more good may be done by having in the Presbyterian church two kinds of organizations, for the promotion of missions and the education of youth for the gospel ministry, rather than one only. We frankly confess that the time has been, when we yielded to this opinion, although always contrary to that which our own reasoning and observation led us to adopt-We found so many of those with whom we had been accustomed to think and act, of the mind of the professor, that we distrusted our own opinion, and consented to act on theirs. It has been, on a more careful and thorough examination of the subject, aided by an attentive observation of the practical effects of the operation of two distinct and competing organizations in the same church, that we have, although with real reluctance, decisively adopted the sentiments contained in this part of our Review. By so doing we have only returned to our original views-after giving proof that we have not been so obstinate and unyielding, as some seem willing to represent us. We have consented that an experiment should be made, in which a multitude had much confidence, but in which ours was always little; and the result has been a complete conviction that the plan tends to the prostration and ruin of the Presbyterian church, and to a very injurious interference with the best method of prosecuting Christian missions, and the education of men for the ministry of the gospel. When the London Missionary Society was fitting out its first mission to the island of Otaheite, now called Tahiti, a wonderful zeal was awakened to organize societies of the same kind in the Presbyterian church in this country; and one such society was actually formed and put in operation in the state of New York. We then used all our influence in opposition to this plan; observing that our church was already organized, in the best form, for the prosecution of missions both foreign and domestic; and that those who had zeal on this subject, which we were glad to witness, had only to turn that zeal into the channel already opened for it, in the missionary operations going on under the direction of the General Assembly of our church. The opinion which we advocated at that time prevailed; and several Indian Missions were commenced, and prosecuted for a time, with encouraging success. The fate of these missions we shall not now particularly notice Some account of them may be seen in the Appendix to the General Assembly's Digest, from which it will appear, that in the Cherokee nation, the missionary operations of our church broke up the ground, and sowed much of the seed, from which the missions of the A. B. C. F. M. have since reaped such a blessed and glorious harvest. The sum of the matter is that Board, till the recent institution of "The