new honour on even the genius
of the Rev. Mr. Cumming.

It is mainly, however, from the Episcopalian tone of the article
that we derive our evidence. The writer seems to hold, with Charles
II., that Presbyterianism is no fit religion for a gentleman. True,
the Moderates were genteel men, of polish and propriety, such as
Mr. Jaffray of Dunbar, who never at synod or presbytery did or
said anything that was not strictly polite; but then the Moderates
had but little of Presbyterianism in their religion, and perhaps,
notwithstanding their 'quiet, amiable, and courteous demeanour,'
little of religion itself. It is to quite a different class that
the hope of the writer turns. He states that 'melancholy facts and
strong arguments against the practical working of Presbytery is at
this moment impressing itself in Scotland on every unprejudiced
spectator;' that there is a party, however, 'with whom the ministerial
office is a sacred investiture, transmitted by succession through
pastor to pastor, and from age to age,--men inducted to their
respective parishes, not because their flocks like or dislike them,
but because the superintending authorities, after the exercise of
solemn, minute, and patient investigation, have determined that
this or that pastor is the fittest and best for this or that parish;'
that there exist in this noble party 'the germs of a possible
unity with the southern Church;' and that there is doubtless a
time coming when the body of our Establishment, 'sick of slavery under
the name of freedom, and of sheer Popery under Presbyterian
colours, shall send up three of their best men to London for
consecration, and Episcopacy shall again become the adoption of
Scotland.' Rarely has the imagination of the poet conjured up a
vision of greater splendour. The minister of the Scotch Church,
London, may die Archbishop of St. Andrews. And such an archbishop!
We are told in the article that 'the channel along which ministerial
orders are to be transmitted is the pastors of the Church, whether
they meet together in the presbytery, or are compressed and
consolidated in the bishop.' But is not this understating the case
on the Episcopal side? What would not Scotland gain if she could
compress and consolidate a simple presbytery, such as that of
Edinburgh--its Chalmers and its Gordon, its Candlish and its
Cunningham, its Guthrie, its Brown, its Bennie, its Begg--in
short, all its numerous members--into one great Bishop John