veral denominations; Baptists, Lutherans, Congregationalists, Tunkers, Moravians, Mennonites, Quakers, Independents, Roman Catholics.

That, without expressing any opinion upon the propriety of supporting the ministers of Dissenting denominations from public funds, the society regards with the deepest concern the proposed departure from the practice hitherto observed by the British government, and solemnly sanctioned by parliament, of making provision for the maintenance of clergymen of the Church of Eugland in proportion to the growing population of the colonies, and thus supplying the spiritual wants of her majesty's subjects, who have settled in British America, confiding in the assurance of the government and legislature, that they and their children should be furnished with means of religious instruction similar to those which they enjoyed at home.

That, if it be thought fit to afford religious instruction to Dissenters at the public charge, such charge should be borne by funds other than those set apart by parliament for the maintenance of clergymen of the Established Church; and that at a time when one hundred and fifty additional clergymen are required to minister to congregations in the Canadas, and the sum of money applicable to the maintenance of clergymen is insufficient to meet the necessities of the case, it will be highly detrimental to the interests of our holy religion to sanction a bill by which that sum will be reduced to an inconsiderable pittance.

That, there are several important questions respecting the true meaning and interpretation of the act of 1791, upon which it is desirable to obtain the opinion of her majesty's judges before the bill upon your lordships' table becomes the law of the land.

That although by the act of 1791 power is given to the colonial legislature of Canada to vary or repeal, subject to a veto on the part of either house of the imperial parliament, the provisions of that act for the allotment or appropriation of clergy

reserves, and for the erection of parishes, grave doubts are entertained respecting the competence of the colonial legislature to interfere, in such a manner as will divert the application of the clergy reserves from the purposes specifically defined in the statute, much more to transfer a fund provided for a Protestant clergy to the maintenance of the Roman Catholic religion-an event which must certainly happen if the plan now proposed for adoption in Upper Canada be regarded as a precedent for the adoption of a like plan in the Lower Province,

That it is also doubtful whether the clause (41) of the act of 1791, enabling the provincial legislature to vary or repeal the provisions of that act, respecting the allotment and appropriation of lands for the maintenance of a Protestant clergy, gives them any authority to legislate respecting lands already allotted or appropriated, and still more whether it empowers them to apply the proceeds of lands sold under the authority of the act of 1827 to purposes not contemplated in that act.

That, supposing these legal questions to have been decided in conformity with the sentiments of the existing government of Upper Canada, it will remain for your lordships to consider the justice and expediency of the provisions contained in the bill recently transmitted from that province.

That, in the message on the subject of the clergy reserves addressed by his majesty, in January, 1832, to the House of Assembly of Upper Canada, recommending them to consider how their authority might be used "most advantageously to the spiritual and temporal interests of his majesty's faithful subjects in that province," it was declared as the result of his majesty's inquiries, that the changes sought for in the disposition of the clergy reserves might be carried into effect, "without sacrificing the just claims of the established Churches of England and Scotland;" and the society trusts that the claims which were recognized so explicitly in the year 1832 will not be overlooked at the present time.

That, so late as in the year 1839, two measures obtained the approbation of the provincial legislature of Upper Canada, by the first of which it was provided that salaries of £100 a-year should be paid for from the proceeds of the clergy reserves to each clergyman of the Church of England, resident according to certain specified terms in that province; while by the second it was provided, that the reserves should be sold, and the purchase-money be paid into the hands of the receiver-general of the province, to be appropriated by the imperial parliament to religious pur

poses.

That, although the first of these enactments, after having passed both the Houses of Assembly and the Legislative council, was subsequently rejected in the House of Assembly by a very small majority; and the second, when transmitted to this country did not obtain her majesty's assent; yet the fact that such measures were favourably entertained in the year 1839 by the provincial legis lature affords a complete answer to those who assume, that if the bill now before parliament be rejected, it will be impossible to obtain better, or even as good, terms for the Church of England on any future occasion.

That the interposition of the provincial legislature is not necessary to the attainment of any objects sought for by the clergy and other members of the Church of England, who desire only that the meaning of the act of 1791 should be determined by competent authority, and its provisions carried into effect accordingly. That, after a careful examination of the bill now before your lordships, your petitioners think that it is deficient in every one of the characters by which such a measure ought to be marked, and is constructed upon a plan which prevents even the possibility of effecting the objects which it professes to have in view.

By proposing to sell the clergy reserves at the present time, when the price of land in Upper Canada is necessarily much below its intrinsic value, it gives up the great principle of the act of 1791, that of making

a provision for clergymen in proportion to the increasing population and cultivation of the province.

By investing the proceeds of future sales, and also of former sales, under the act of 1827," in any security within the province," it exposes the whole sum derived from these sources to imminent danger, if not to certain loss.

By dividing the payments to be made from the interest of these investments among the ministers of all denominations of Christians recognized in the province, the very principle of an established church is renounced, and the state proclaims itself indifferent to the maintenance of the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England.

By requiring a census of the people to be taken once in every four years according to their different religious persuasions, the expense of which, under a special commission, is to be charged upon the clergy reserves, and will swallow up a large portion of their produce, and by enacting that the remainder of that produce shall be divided among the different denominations in proportion to their numbers, it will cause the incomes of the clergy to fluctuate in a manner wholly inconsistent with their comfort, respectability, and usefulness, and will increase and perpetuate the religious dissensions which it is the professed object of the measure to prevent; while, by enabling any five persons interested in the affairs of the various denominations, and thinking themselves aggrieved by the distribution of the fund, to proceed in the Court of Chancery for the redress of their grievance, it gives encouragement to endless litigation, and provides every discontented individual with the means of disturbing the public peace.

That for these and other reasons, your petitioners, while they express their earnest wish that some mode may be devised for settling the difficult questions connected with the clergy reserves in Upper and Lower Canada, are firmly convinced that no permanent settlement of them is to be expected from the bill now upon

your lordships' table, and humbly pray your lordships that it may not be suffered to pass into a law.

And your petitioners will ever pray, &c.

PROTESTANT RESISTANCE TO POPISH INNOVATIONS.

(To the Editor of the Record.) Sir, I was much interested in reading an article in the Morning Herald of Friday, April 3, entitled "Papal Encroachments," and which was extracted from the Hull Packet. It concluded with the following paragraph, which I feel persuaded will interest many of your readers. :

"One cheering indication of the indisposition of Protestants to abandon the established rules and ceremonies of our Church, to adventure on the ocean of Papal innovation, is announced by the Doncaster Chroniele, when stating that the incumbent of Skipton church has resigned his incumbency, the congregation refusing to sanction the novelties condemned by this journal, and ably denounced by our contemporary. That excellent prelate, the Bishop of Ripon, has likewise discountenanced the erection in the diocese, of churches on the Puseyite model; and the utility of the Protestant press was never more remarkably attested, than in the results that have followed the exposure of the unwarrantable innovations,'

If the above statement be correct, I would congratulate the congregation of Skipton, on having successfully resisted, with true Protestant feeling, a bold and daring attempt to introduce papal mummery into the worship of a Protestant congregation. If they have thus acted, they are entitled to our thanks, for having set an example which ought to be followed by every congregation that may be assailed with such attempts to corrupt the simplicity of Christian worship. It is high time that it should be resisted. If any clergyman abandons the reading-desk from which it has been customary to read the service, and thinks proper to read it with his back to the people, let the congregation appeal to the Bishop, and see whether there is not autho

rity and law enough left to compel him to turn his face again to the people and read the service from its "accustomed place." Why should every Protestant feeling be insulted amidst the exultations of Popery? It may appear a trifle to some persons, but to me, the least assimilation of a Protestant church to a Popish mass-house, is anything but a trifle. Is it a trifle to tell the church of Rome that she has been right, and we have been wrong for almost the last three hundred years? Is it nothing for Protestants to witness their minister officiating after the manner of a Romish priest, with his back to the people, and his face to the "altar ?" I maintain that such Papal encroachments ought to be resisted by a Protestant congregation. If it is right and proper, and the bounden duty of one clergyman to read the service from a footstool and the lessons from a lectern, it is the duty of all. But will any of our Bishops at present be so bold as to insist upon it as an act of uniformity," or even go so far as to set such an example? Why, then, do they suffer in others what they would scruple to do themselves?

LUTHER.

ACHILL MISSION.

Mr. Nangle has addressed the following letter to the editor of the Magazine of Natural History, which we willingly insert:

'Missionary Settlement, Achill Island, April 8, 1840.

"Sir, I am indebted to the kindness of some anonymous correspondent for the following extract from an article entitled "Notes on Irish Natural History," which appeared in the thirty-sixth number of your magazine, and as it contains what seems to me very uncandid misrepresentations of the character of the establishment which is entrusted to my superintendence, I trust your sense of justice will induce you to publish this letter, supplying the facts which the writer of the article to which I have alluded, has thought fit to suppress.

"The objectionable passage to

which my attention has been directed is as follows:

"The natives of Achill are charged with being thieves and murderers; and if I were to place full reliance on all I heard at the settlement they would appear to be so. Mr. Long, however, with everything constantly exposed, walls and hedges being here unknown, and living amongst a population from whom he has no power to defend himself, has never lost even a potatoe. I allude not to this politically, but bearing in mind solely the natural history of the island and its capability of improvement, I pronounce without hesitation, that if goodness of soil, lowness of rent, cheapness of labour, and safety of property be recommendations, then no spot I have ever seen is more likely to reward the emigrant than the island of Achill. Would that some unpolitical and unsectarian philanthropists, men who took a human view of the human wants and human failings of these poor islanders, would settle among them and place in their hands, the plough and the spade, teach the children to read and write, the boys to make shoes and coats, to fish and to dig, and rake, and sow and reap, and build houses; and the girls to knit, and spin, and make gowns; use them like brothers and sisters and children, then might this island become a centre of happiness and prosperity.'

"I am sure, Sir, that candour will constrain you to admit, that any person forming a judgment of our proceedings from the statements contained in the above extract, would conclude that we took no care whatever to promote the temporal interests of our poor neighbours, or the general improvement of the island. This is a most unfair and ungenerous misrepresentation. We are at considerable cost and much labour, teaching the children to read and write,' the boys to make shoes and coats, to build houses,'' the girls to knit and make gowns, &c,' and the men to adopt an improved system of agriculture. But, Sir, as I wish to give you proof and not assertion, let me call your attention to the following extracts from the authorized Re

port of the evidence given before the Committee of the House of Lords, which sat on the Irish Education system in 1837. The first witness, from whose evidence I make the following brief extract, is J. Dombrain, Esq., Inspector-General of Coastguard in Ireland.

"Were you ever in the Island of Achill officially?—Several times.

"In the course of the last two years? I was there last summer and the year before.

"Did you visit the Protestant settlement there?—I did.

"In what state did you find it; was it in a state different from the rest of the island, or like the rest of the island?-Very different from the rest of the island.

"Was it in a state inferior or superior?-Very superior.

"In what respect? - Generally superior in respect of industry and cultivation; it had superior buildings and everything that would stamp an appearance of civilization, in a very remote district.

"As far, therefore as appeared to you, it would be a great blessing to the island if the example so set could be followed through the island?-Decidedly.'

"Such, Sir, was the sworn testimony of Mr. Dombrain. Not less decisive is the evidence of another witness, Francis Reynolds, Esq., Chief Officer of Coast-guard, who was examined before the same Committee.

"How long have you been in Achill? I have been in Achill this last time, six years.

"Had you ever been there before?—I had, for three years.

"What interval was there between the two times of residence?— About three years.

"You were therefore there when Mr. Nangle came, in 1834?—I was.

"Did you see any improvement produced in the island?I did, I saw great improvement in the cultivation of the land, and also in having schools for the instruction of the children.

"Did the people testify any feeling towards Mr. Nangle at that time? They always appeared to me at the

time to be very fond of Mr. Nangle, and to like him very much.

"When were the first indications of a different feeling towards Mr. Nangle ?-When the priest gave orders to shout after the Protestants whenever they saw them.'

"This evidence needs no comment, it convicts the writer in your Magazine of what, in the judgment of every honourable man, is equivalent to falsehood,a deceptious suppression of truth.

"The allusion to Mr. Long, in the article which has called forth these remarks, induces me to believe that it was written by an English tourist who paid a hasty visit to this is land last summer. I think his name was Newman; I accompanied that gentleman and the Rev. Wm. Prior Moore, Head Master of the College of Cavan, who was then at the settlement, to Mr. Long's, and I shall now detail the whole of the conversation from which the writer in your Magazine has selected as much as suited his purpose. As we walked across the mountain I remarked that a system of petty thieving prevailed generally in Ireland, to an extent which operated as a check on the expenditure of capital for the improvement of the country, and I attributed the prevalence of this evil to the Romish doctrine, which teaches that a sum, amounting to some shillings, may be stolen from a gentleman, without the guilt of mortal sin. When we arrived at Mr. Long's, the English tourist asked him whether he had suffered much from petty depredations? He replied in the negative. I remarked,that that could readily be accounted for, as he lived in the centre of a large tract of land, where there was not a single human habitation within a mile of him. To this Mr. Long assented, at the same time remarking that he was further secured against depredation, by there being no thoroughfare through the valley in which his house was situated; but, added Mr. Long, notwithstanding these peculiar securities, I have a man summoned at this moment

for cutting my grass. Here the conversation ended. Mrs. Long then came into the room, and, without knowing the subject of our previous

conversation, she began to speak about the Coast-guards in the next village, saying, that they complained sadly that they could not have a garden, for such a system of thieving prevailed in the village, that their neighbours would not leave them so much as a cabbage. I immediately told our English tourist to note that. It seems, however, that my admonition was unheeded: this unsectarian and unpolitical gentleman, in the plenitude of his liberality, was determined to shut his eyes and close his ears against every fact that did not square with his preconceived theory.

"Permit me further to remark, that if the writer of the article in your Magazine means to say that I described the Achill islanders as sinners above the rest of their countrymen, he grievously misrepresents my sentiments. I believe that all men, whether they be Papists or nominal Protestants, if unconverted and unregenerated, are alike sinners before God. Without at all infringing on this truth, I admit that some men are naturally more gentle and tractable as regards their intercourse with their fellow-men than others, and I have always given the Achill people credit for a large share of this animal amiability; indeed, I never experienced anything but kindness from them until their passions were kindled by the inflammatory harangues of their priests; since then we have lived in an element of violence and outrage; many of us have suffered personal violence, and one has been murdered. I allude to Mr. Reynolds, whose testimony I have quoted in a previous part of this letter. We, however, do not repine. I trust we can say of our persecutors in the forgiving spirit of our blessed Master, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.'

"In conclusion, the writer in your Magazine expresses a wish that some unsectarian and unpolitical philanthropist would settle in this dreary island. The former epithet, if Ï mistake not, is intended to designate any individual who views Christianity through such a mist of uncertainty and doubt that its peculiar doctrines seem to him not worthy of being contended for.

Such persons