to throw a paralysis over his rational and moral and physical energies, he was heard, first in feeble, and then in more audible tones, to exclaim, and it was the last distinct articulation which fell from his lip, while he remained in full possession of his reason- "Home-home-1 am going

home." Amen.

MEMOIR OF REV. J. P. CUNNINGHAM, LATE PASTOR OF PISGAH CHURCH, KENTUCKY.

A pamphlet of twelve pages, bearing the above title, has been sent us, containing a modest, well-written account of the estimable young ministerial brother to whom it relates-The memoir concludes as follows:

"In a letter to his father, written in August, he states his intention of visiting the South, and of seeking a home in East Florida, should a kind Providence permit; but adds, these pleasing anticipations may never be realized. You know, my dear father, some of the many strong attachments I have to time; but all these put together, do not weigh a feather, when put in contrast with the will of my heavenly Father. When this is ascertained, my motto is-Thy will be done!

"The faint hope which lingered around his mind soon disappeared. He viewed the event which was soon to separate him from all that was dear on earth, with calmness and composure. A letter from one who witnessed the concluding scene with much interest, says, 'his latter days were tranquil; he would often speak of salvation by the cross of Christ, with as much clearness and consistency, as he was accustomed to do from the pulpit-of the supports and consolations treasured up in the Gospel, as suited to the wants of the believer in life and in death. He retained the régular exercise of his mind to the last, and his speech, until a few hours before his death.' The venerable brother who preached his funeral sermon, in a letter to a friend in Tuscaloosa, says, 'Brother Cunningham assisted me in the administration of the Lord's Supper, at Walnut Hill, in May-preached two or three times with great liberty-his audience was large and attentive, and appeared to take a deep and affectionate interest in these sermons. His address to the communicants at the close of the service-his mode of preaching -his courteous manner, made a deep and favourable impression on the congregation, such as few strangers have ever done; and we all rejoiced to think, we should have many such opportunities.' 'He died,' says the same brother, 'beloved and lamented by all who knew him. I was unable to see brother Cunningham in the last solemn scene, as the cholera was raging in my own family. But from the testimony of many private friends, and ministers of the Gospel, particularly our much esteemed friend and accredited missionary to the Indians, Mr. Bushnell, who was with him near the closing scene, declared that his death was a triumphant one-no darkness of doubt obscured the vision of his soul.'

"Another friend from Kentucky, who witnessed the last hour of his life, says, 'His friends around his bed, viewing with much interest his departure, could scarcely conjecture the time when his spirit departed -no muscle altered, no feature changed-a visible serenity-a solemn awful concentration of thought appeared to cover from the eye of the observer for some minutes, his exit from time to eternity. "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord"-Happy, thrice happy, my brother,

thy home, prepared and furnished for thee by our blessed Saviour-I would not have thee return to our world of sin and wo, but wait and watch until the Master call me up higher!"

It appears, then, from this brief survey of the life and death of our brother, that consistency of character, and conformity to the will of God, was his distinguishing feature. In the social circle, in the confidential interview, in the sacred desk, he exhibited the same elevated heavenly oneness of feeling and purpose, which made the world feel and acknowledge him as the minister of Jesus Christ.”

We have seen it publicly announced that the REV. JOHN COULTER died on Sabbath the 22d of June, at his residence in Tuscarora Valley, Juniata County, Pa., in the sixtieth year of his age. We long knew, and highly esteemed this excellent man, and faithful minister of the Gospel of Christ. He was endeared to us by his sterling orthodoxy, humble but fervent piety, and great activity and punctuality in the discharge of every duty. If we could obtain, from any of the intimate acquaintance of Mr. Coulter, a brief memoir of his life, it would give us pleasure to insert it in the Christian Advocate, to which he was long and to the last a subscriber."

In addition to the foregoing mournful announcements, we have to state, that by a late arrival from Liberia, intelligence has been received of the death of the Rev. Messrs. Cloud and Laird, and also of Mrs. Laird, the wife of the latter-African missionaries, under the direction of the Western Missionary Society. They, as well as a Methodist missionary and his wife, died of the fever, to which all, or nearly all, are subject, shortly after their arrival at Liberia. They had, it appears, recovered from the first attack of fever; but on its recurrence a second time it proved fatal. Thus four missionaries of this society-for the lamented Barr was one-set apart to carry the tidings of salvation to the benighted Africans, have died before they could enter on their work. We hope the African mission will not be relinquished; but if any means can be devised of pursuing it with less hazard and expense of human life, such means ought to be diligently sought after and faithfully applied. There is a language in these providential dispensations, the import of which should be considered and regarded.

Review.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN MAY AND JUNE, .1834.

We now, agreeably to an intimation in our last number, enter on a review of the proceedings of the late General Assembly of our church -Not the whole of those proceedings, but those chiefly which have a bearing, either direct or collateral, on the present crisis of the church. Of some other acts we may take a passing notice, and some we shall wholly omit.

Notwithstanding the resolution of the late General Assembly, in the case of the rejected memorial, "That this General Assembly cannot

sanction the censure contained in the memorial, against proceedings and measures of former General Assemblies," we shall speak our mind freely and fearlessly-subject, we hope, on the one hand, to the constant recollection, that intemperate language always injures the cause which it seeks to promote; and on the other, under a deep conviction, that the present is not a time to keep back any truth, however unwelcome, which affects the welfare of the church, or to state it in other than the plainest terms. If the Supreme Judicatory of our church might violate the constitution under which it exists, and deprive subordinate judicatories and individuals of their rights and privileges, and then put a muzzle upon all concerned, in order to prevent complaint and a just exposure of unconstitutional and oppressive acts -then might we bid a long farewell to all hope of reform, and to all Christian liberty-the very spirit of the Papacy would be dominant in the Presbyterian church. But blessed be God, we live in a country and under a civil government, where ecclesiastical tyranny, whether Papal or Presbyterian, cannot be exercised over those who do not submit to it of their own voluntary choice.

Immediately before the final vote on the Memorial was taken, we felt constrained to raise our feeble warning voice, to remind the Assembly, that they might reduce the Memorialists to the necessity of following the example, and adopting the language of the apostles, before the grand Jewish Sanhedrim-" Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye." We had previously taken occasion to remark, that if the Memorialists and their friends should be compelled to assume a standing by themselves, they would be entitled to hold the very language which was held by the Protestant reformers, when it was objected to them by the Romanists that they were schismatics, separating themselves from the church of Christ-"We do not separate ourselves from the church," said the Protestants; "we take the church with us. We are the true church of Christ, whose holy truths and laws you have disregarded; and to you we leave your own perversions and abuses; but the true church of Christ is with us, and we will maintain it." Now we verily think that the time has come to which we thus adverted in the Assembly; the time when the real friends and adherents to the doctrines and order of the Presbyterian church as laid down in our acknowledged standards, are called on to recur to first principles; are, called on to obey God rather than man; to maintain with Christian firmness that system of evangelical truth and church government to which every officer of the church is pledged, by an engagement equivalent to a solemn oath; to maintain this system, although future General Assemblies shall, like the last, set it at nought; and that in doing so, if a separation shall eventually take place between them and their brethren, the adherents to the system will be the true Presbyterian church, and their opponents will be the real Seceders-They have already treated the constitution with palpable disregard, and are therefore Seceders in fact; they will then appear to be so in form, as well as in fact.

In entering on our review of the proceedings of the last General Assembly, we have thought proper to make the foregoing remarks, that our readers may at once be apprized of the general impression under which we write, and may have an opportunity to examine-for we court scrutiny-whether we have not good reason, from the facts and documents we shall lay before them, to take the ground we have assumed, and which we shall endeavour to maintain.

Had we not observed in a religious periodical which we respect, a pretty heavy censure bestowed on the report of the committee to which was referred the question relative to the validity of baptism by a Popish priest, and the adoption of that report by the Assembly, we should have passed this item without notice. The question was first brought before the Assembly by a reference from the Synod of New York, in 1831. It was referred, as we find by the printed minutes, to a committee consisting of Dr. Miller, Mr. Frost, and Mr. Sweetland, and was reported on, in the course of the sessions of that year. The report, after being laid on the table and remaining there for more than a week, was taken up, and referred for consideration to the next General Assembly. When brought before the Assembly of 1832, the subject was discussed at two successive sittings, and then committed to a committee consisting of Dr. Cox, Dr. Beman, and Mr. R. J. Breckinridge. This committee, on the third day after their appointment, " made a report, which, together with the report made to the last Assembly, and the whole subject, was committed to Dr. Alexander, Dr. Richards, Dr. Baxter, Dr. Beman, and Dr. Robert G. Wilson, with directions to report to the next General Assembly." The record in the minutes of the next year-the Assembly of 1833-is as follows, viz.-"Dr. Alexander, one of the committee to whom was referred, by the last Assembly, the question 'Whether baptism by a Popish priest ought to be considered as valid?' made a report; when, after some discussion, it was resolved, that this subject, with all the papers relative to it, which have been before the Assembly, be committed to Dr. Miller, Dr. Alexander, Dr. Green, Mr. Breckinridge, Mr. Barnes, Dr. Spring, Dr. M'Auley, and Dr. M'Cartee, to report to the next General Assembly. The final record on this subject, in the minutes of the last Assembly, is in the following words-"The committee to which was referred the question 'Whether baptism by a Popish priest ought to be considered as valid?' made a report; when the committee, agreeably to their request made in the report, were discharged from the further consideration of the subject."

The foregoing detail has been given, to show that this is not one of the subjects that has been lightly treated by the General Assembly. It has been under consideration and review for four successive years, The committees appointed to examine and report upon it have, first and last, consisted of four professors in our Theological Seminaries, as well as of members possessing every variety and shade of sentiment on theological points, to be found among the heterogeneous materials of which our church and its highest judicatory are at present composed. It has also been repeatedly discussed on the floor of the Assembly; and yet no satisfactory result could be reached. The last report, which was a very brief one, ought to have appeared in full, on the minutes. It was handed by the chairman of the last committee to the present writer, as the only member of the committee who was also a member of the house. By him it was read to the Assembly, accompanied with a few remarks to this effect-that the committee did not think that any act on this subject which could be passed by the Assembly, would be either satisfactory or for edification; since it was found, that there was a conscientious difference of opinion among the ministers of our church on this vexed question, which could not be yielded to any decision of the Assembly that should attempt to control it-That it was therefore believed to be the right course, not to legislate on the point at all; but to leave it to be acted on, agreeably to the

conscientious conviction of those who might be called, in the discharge of ministerial duty, to decide upon it; and that the committee, entertaining this belief, requested to be discharged.

There is no variety of opinion among the ministers and members of the Presbyterian church, in regard to the corruption of the Romish church-That this church is most deeply and awfully corrupt, is universally believed; but whether this corruption is such that the initiatory ordinance of baptism ought to be held as entirely invalid and null, in every instance in which it is professedly administered in that church, is the point on which the difference exists; and we happen to know, that it is a difference which always has existed, from the earliest periods of the Presbyterian church in this country, to the present time. The more carefully and deeply the point is examined, the more it will be seen that it has extensive and important connexions and bearings, which ought to command the most mature and grave consideration. It is an essential protestant principle, and explicitly recognised in the creed of our church-"That God alone is the Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of faith and worship." Now, as we have already stated, there is a conscientious difference among the ministers of our church, on the point in question; and therefore we think it is well that the Assembly has left it "free from the commandments of men."

The next important subject that came before the General Assembly was the appeal and complaint of the 2d Presbytery of Philadelphia, formed by the General Assembly of 1832, in opposition to the decision of the Synod of Philadelphia, and on the principle of elective affinity.

It will be recollected that the Synod of Philadelphia, which met in the autumn of 1832, refused to receive as a constituent part of its body, the Presbytery thus formed; it being formed, as the Synod maintained, in violation of the constitution of the church-that complaint of this refusal was made by the rejected Presbytery to the Assembly of 1833-that the subject was referred by that Assembly to a committee, by whom a compromise was reported, which it was supposed would satisfy the parties concerned, and place the Presbytery formed by the Assembly in the Synod of Philadelphia, as an integral part of the same. Here, however, it is important to observe, that although it was stated by the committee of the Assembly that 31 members of the Synod had been conversed with, and had agreed to the compromise, yet the committee, regularly appointed by the Synod as their representation in this concern when it should come before the Assembly, never did consent to the compromise, but resisted it earnestly; and when the report of the Assembly's committee was before the house, the chairman of the Synod's committee, acting in its behalf, sought to introduce a remonstrance against the compromise, but it was not permitted to be received or read.

We shall now give the whole proceedings of the Synod of Philadelphia of 1833 on this subject, together with the proceedings of the last Assembly, and the Protest which followed the decision-This will occupy more space than we can well spare, but in the present state of our church, we think it important that this subject should be well understood. Our principal remarks will be reserved till the quotations are fully before our readers-We shall make a few as we proceed.