tion, experience a loss-the church of Christ, of which he was a highly gifted ambassador, will mourn his removal. He was an able champion for evangelical truth; he was an animated, powerful and eloquent preacher of Righteousness, and "a burning and shining light" among the ministers of reconciliation. The power which he exerted in our society was conspicuous and commanding; and was a presage of more enlarged usefulness as he ripened in years: it becomes us, however, to bow in submission to the purposes of the great Head of the Church, who calls and disposes of, at will, those who labour in his own vineyard. The course of Mr. Fullerton, although short, was bright: already when a mere youth, his praise had been in the churches. His ripening talents, the enthusiasm of

his heart, were dedicated to the good of his charge, and their advancement in pure and undefiled religion. If it be cause of sorrow, that a bond of union, which all of them wished to be lasting, has been thus early severed, it is a source of gratulation still, that they have had in his ministry the beginning of his strength, and the freshest impulses of his mind. While our much lamented pastor was, as an instrument, training others for that high career which, beginning on earth, terminates in heaven, he was himself disciplined in the school of affliction. He bore all with exemplary patience, as an example to his flock. Many tender ties have been broken by this painful event--and many hearts are saddened, which can only be soothed by the balm of Christian consolation.

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 422.) The second error of Dr. Miller which we proposed to notice is, the exaggerated representation he gives-not through design, but misapprehension-of the want of literary qualifications in those whom the New Side presbyteries licensed to preach the gospel, and afterwards ordained as evangelists and pastors. In pages 7 and 8 of his first letter, he represents them as having

"a disposition to license almost any young man who offered himself, however great a novice he might be, and however defective in literary acquirements, provided he appeared pious."

He states that, with a view to prevent this evil, the Synod in 1734 passed an act, directing that

"young men be first examined respecting their literature, by a commission of Synod, and obtain a testimony of their ap probation, before they can be taken on trial by any presbytery. This act, however, though regularly adopted by the Synod, was not duly regarded by all the presbyteries; and especially in one signal instance, adapted by its circumstances to create general attention and deep interest, was openly set at defiance and disobeyed, by those ministers who had distinguished themselves by opposing strict Presbyterial order."

Again, in page 10, he says

frequently violating that ecclesiastical or"The New Side were plainly wrong, in der which they had stipulated to observe, in undervaluing literary qualifications for the gospel ministry; and in giving countenance for a time to some real extravagancies and disorders which attended the revival of religion. That the New Side men were sensible of having carried to an extreme their comparative disregard of literary qualifications, and of mature theo

If any credit is due to these minutes, the trials of Mr. Rowland for licensure were the same that had been usual in Presbyteries generally, till the period when they took place; and the Presbytery declare their entire satisfaction with the manner in which they were passed. Nor does it appear that he was afterwards regarded as a man of inferior endowments of any kind; although the Synod refused to enroll him among their members, because he was licensed in opposition to their rule. We learned in early life from one who had heard him preach, that he was a most powerful speaker, and instrumental of much good, especially in alarming those who were at ease in their sins; and this estimate of his character is also favoured by what appears on the records of the Presbytery, relative to the appointments which were made him, for a number of years in suc

cession.

We have carefully examined the minutes of the Presbytery of New Brunswick, from the time of its formation in 1738 till it became a member of the Synod of New York, in 1745, and have noted the names of every man whom they licensed during this period-They are as follows-John Rowland, James M'Crea, William Robinson,

Samuel Finley, Charles M'Knight, Saml. Sacket, Charles Beatty, William Dean, Daniel Lawrence, and Andrew Hunter. Not one of these was a novice," nor according to the rate of attainments then usually made by candidates for the gospel ministry, "defective in literary acquirements." Samuel Finley was probably a better scholar than any man in the old Synod, with the exception of Francis Allison and Alexander M'Dowell, and but little, if at all, inferior to them. Most of the others left a reputatation for excellence in ministerial qualifications and usefulness, which was fresh and fragrant in the first years of our own ministerial life; and of not one of them did we ever hear a disreputable account or anecdote-for we reckon as nothing a low and slanderous pamphlet which was published with intent to ridicule some of them. Not having access to the minutes of New Castle Presbytery, (the only other New Side Presbytery before the formation of the Synod of New York, in 1745,) we cannot note the names of their licentiates during the seven years to which our attention is now confined. Shortly after this period, however, it was the privilege of this Presbytery to license Samuel Davies and John Rodgers, no "novices" surely. As an eloquent and successful preacher, President Davies has had no rival in the American church.

We have been particular in examining the evidence of precipitate licensures previously to the formation of the Synod of New York, because this is the period during which the most flagrant instances of such licensure have always been represented as having taken place. After the Synod was formed, the allegation of deficient literature in candidates for the ministry was still continued, but the charge was general and indefinite, and therefore little worthy

of regard. If any inference relative to the comparative regard shown to literature in the rival Synods, were drawn from the manner in which their records were kept, it would be decisively in favour of the New Side. Their records appear in decent volumes, in a fair hand, and in tolerably accurate and methodical statement; while those of the Old Side are glaringly deficient in nearly all these particulars, and in some parts are shamefully careless and slovenly, inaccurate and scarcely legible.

We have seen that the members of the first Presbytery that was organized in our country were foreigners, with the exception of one Congregationalist from New England. They were all men of learning, according to the estimate of the times in which they lived. But there probably was not a single grammar school at that time, in the whole region in which they performed their ecclesiastical duties. As early as 1710, a Welchman, by the name of David Evans, was put under the care of a committee of the Presbytery, to be prepared for licensure After being instructed by this committee for two or three years he was licensed; and probably with less literary attainments than any individual whom the New Side Presbyteries ever sent forth to preach the gospel. The first regular grammar school of which we have any account, was that established at Neshamony, by William Tennent, Sen. (afterwards known by the name of the Log College,) about the time (1717) that the original Presbytery became large enough to be divided, and to take the form of a Synod. From that period till 1738, the year when the rule was formed which required all candidates to be examined by a committee of Synod, Mr. Tennent's establishment had been the literary fountain, at which theological stu

dents imbibed the classical and other knowledge by which they were prepared for Presbyterial trials. In the mean time, Francis Allison, afterwards Dr. Allison, arrived from Ireland-He appears to have arrived in 1735, but his name first appears on the Synodical records in 1737. He was eminently a classical scholar-a graduate of the University of Glasgow. He doubtless wished to raise the scale of literary qualifications in candidates for the gospel ministry-observing how inferior they were to those he had been familiar with in Scotland and Ireland. He established a school under his own supervision, and obtained for it Synodical countenance and patronage; and we have little doubt, although the records do not show it, that he was the projector and penman of the rule so offensive to the New Brunswick Presbytery. Here, we have not a doubt, was the radical cause of the conflict which ensued, and the acrimony which attended it. The Tennents and their particular friends, viewed this new rule of Synod as implying dissatisfaction with the manner in which preparation for the gospel ministry had long been made in the Log College; and they were indignant at the unjust imputation which they thought was cast upon them and their favourite institution, by this new measure. Personal rivalry also, as literary instructers, between the Tennents and Dr. Allison, we fear, had its influence in embittering the controversy. The result was, that the Tennents and their supporters determined to go on as they had long been accustomed to do-not in licensing novices, which they had never done, but without insisting on raising the demand for literary qualifications, when the cry for preachers of the gospel was loud, general and importunate. After a while, however, they probably did raise their standard

of literary attainments. The school at Fog's Manor, under Samuel Blair, (a scholar of the elder Tennent,) that at West Nottingham under Mr., afterwards Dr. Finley; and that at Elizabethtown, under Mr. Dickinson, out of which grew the college of New Jersey, produced scholars of no inferior order. On the other side, the school at New London, under Dr. Allison, afterwards transferred to Newark, Delaware, and put under the care of Mr. M'Dowell, (Dr. Allison being removed to Philadelphia, as Rector of an Academy, and afterwards Vice Provost of the College there,) endeavoured to carry into full effect the rule of the Synod, which aimed to increase the literary qualifications of ministers of the gospel in the Presbyterian church. That the candidates for licensure who came out of these latter establishments were generally better scholars than those that proceeded from the rival schools of the New Side Presbyteries, must, we think, be admitted; but its admission by no means implies that the literary attainments of the pupils of the latter were low and mean. Such was not the fact; nor did the efforts made to establish the colege of New Jersey imply this fact. That institution was established with a view to facilitate education, as well as to improve it. To improve it was indeed an object; for in none of the private schools that have been mentioned, could a full course of liberal education be obtained: and doubtless it was gratifying to the New Side clergy to be able to raise the qualifications of their candidates for the ministry, not only to a full equality with that of their rivals, but to a superiority over them. But after a careful investigation of the subject, we verily believe that at no one period did the New Side Presbyters license men of as slender literary acquirements as are now made by many

who receive licensure in the Presbyterian church, and some of whom we have personally known as students of the Theological Seminary at Princeton. We have never advocated or favoured the introduction of men into the ministry without literature-literature, to a considerable extent, of a solid kind—but there is more reason to insist strenuously on its possession now, than there was in the early periods of our church: and we regard it as among the many reforms which the state of our church most loudly calls for, that effectual measures be taken to prevent the introduction of the veriest sciolists into the sacred office of the gospel ministry. Let us employ our zeal in correcting present evils, rather than in censuring those of less magnitude in the infant age of our church.

From a long digression, we now return to state, that the great schism we have been contemplating, resulted in favour of strict Presbyterianism. We have already had occasion to remark, that it became necessary for both Synods to satisfy the publick that they had not abandoned either the creed or the form of government of the Presbyterian church, and that, in this respect, the opposite parties acted as sentinels on each other. We think there is reason to believe that the Synod of New York, which contained a greater number of those who had received a congre gational education than that of Philadelphia, was, from the circumstance we have mentioned, as well as from the intercourse which they found it necessary to cultivate with the Dutch church in this country, and with the General Assem

*We were told by a member of the last General Assembly, that in the region from which he came, it is very common to lifor the gospel ministry, both literary and cense men to preach, whose whole training theological, is completed in the space of three years-sometimes in less.