into the first thing. But this is to lose the end of life for the sake of the means. Many things occur that should put all plans aside for the time. Yet a rule is good. I am always busy, yet I never could study on a plan, or do anything on a plan, which is probably the cause why I have done so little. I am disposed, however, to make another plan (to be broken I do not doubt), and to mark to what extent it may be observed: 1st, To study daily at least three hours. 2nd, To visit at least two hours five days in the week."

"31st August, 1849.-Returned all of us in health from Innerleithen, where my family have rusticated two months, and myself a month, enjoying its streams, and hills, and breezes exceedingly. After all, home and its duties have the greatest and purest charms; and recreations are chiefly useful and pleasant, as disposing one again to return to these with relish and strength."

"3rd September.-This day concluded an important engagement, viz., to take Mr. David Duncan into our family for three or four years. It is a serious matter to have children of one's own, much more to take charge of other people's. May we have grace to discharge this duty faithfully, that God may in all things be glorified through Jesus Christ. It is most gratifying to learn that our good friend Willie* is turning out a good and worthy man. I am most thankful for this."

* An elder brother who had been with Dr. Lee previously.

LIVINGS.-UNIVERSITY TESTS.-RAGGED SCHOOLS.

"To all Popes and Popes' advocates, expostulating, lamenting, and accusing, the answer of the world is,-once for all your Popehood has become untrue. No matter how good it was, how good you say it is, we cannot believe it; the light of our whole mind, given us to walk by from heaven above, finds it henceforth a thing unbelievable."-CARLYLE, Lectures on Heroes, iv.

THE Pope's Bull, dividing Protestant England into Romish bishoprics, Cardinal Wiseman's Pastoral from the Flaminian Gate, and last, not least, Lord John Russell's letter to the Bishop of Durham, kindled a roaring fire of anti-Popish zeal all over Britain towards the close of the year 1850. Though Scotland was not to enjoy the blessings of the restored hierarchy, the heat and the tumult of the conflagration raged north of the Tweed as violently as in the south. Pamphlet and petition flew about; and platform, pulpit, and Church Court rang with the war-cry "Papal Aggression." The government sought, feebly, to give expression to the indignant sentiment of the country by the "Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Act." This piece of legislation was hailed by those who felt themselves aggrieved by the Pope's new invention of titles, as a proper, though, perhaps, inadequate vindication of the rights of the Church and of the Crown. The Presbytery of Edinburgh could not allow

VOL. 1.

L

the opportunity of demonstrating the healthiness of its Protestantism to pass unimproved, and accordingly sent up a petition in favour of Lord John Russell's bill. The resolutions in favour of the bill which the Presbytery adopted on the occasion do not need to be further described when it is mentioned that they were proposed by Dr. Muir. Dr. Lee opposed them, and took exception to the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, for this reason, among others, that it forbade one class of dissenters to do in England that which it allowed another class of dissenters to do in Scotland. The third section of the bill exempted the bishops of the Scotch Episcopal communion from the operation of the act; providing, however, that "nothing herein contained shall be taken to give any right to any such bishop to assume or use any name, style, or title which he is not now by law entitled to assume or use." Accordingly, while the law demanded from the Rev. Dr. Wiseman 100%. of penalty if he used his title of Archbishop of Westminster, it charged the Rev. Dr. Trower nothing for the use of the title of Bishop of Glasgow and Galloway. This seemed, and was, unjust. The offence in each case was the same. It was the assumption and use of territorial titles unknown to the law, and unbestowed by the Sovereign, the fountain of honour. That these titles were, in the case of the Roman Catholic, conferred by a foreign ecclesiastic, though it made their illegality more glaring, did not make the use of them a whit more illegal than in the case of the Scotch Episcopalian, whose misdemeanour lay in the resumption of titles expressly abolished by Parliament. Dr. Lee held the opinion expressed by Sir George Grey, who, during the debate on Papal Aggression in the House of

Commons said, "Those bishops have no shadow of right whatever to assume or use titles drawn from Scottish dioceses. There are those who think it against positive law, the Act of Union embodying the Act of Settlement. That may involve a nice question, but, at all events, they are without law, I believe, in this."

Apart from his strong disapproval of the doctrines commonly held by the Scotch Episcopalian clergy (which he believed to be deeply imbued with what was in those days called "Tractarianism" or "Puseyism"†), he, as a clergyman of the national Church, resented what he considered the childish impertinence of the parade of Episcopal titles, "my Lord Bishop," "the Very Rev. Dean," and so forth, by men who were almost all English, and in a country where there were no bishoprics, no deaneries, no chapters, none of the substance which alone could give reality to the empty names, and where the adherents of their "lordships" the bishops were very few in number, and the believers in their titles, fewer still.

The clause which, though it did not sanction, pre

* March 7, 1851.

+ The strange bigotry and unchristian feeling towards the Church of Scotland evinced by that party in England with which the Scotch Episcopal Church seems to have most sympathy, may be understood from the following extract from a journal supported by the High-Churchmen and High Tories:-" We wonder who the scribe can be who at present furnishes the information for the Court Circular. Among other absurd and incredible records which he chronicles, is the attendance of Her Majesty and Prince Albert at the 'Parish Church of Crathie.' The Court Circular's informant does not appear to be aware that the Queen is a member of the Episcopal Church of England and Ireland, and that the 'parish Church of Crathie' is a Presbyterian place of worship. Common sense might have taught him that Her Majesty, who views episcopacy as a divine ordinance, and has received her solemn consecration to the kingly office at the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury, is not likely to attend the worship of a body whose distinctive tenet is, that Episcopacy is 'a rag of Popery. Besides, if he was not utterly uninformed, he would know that Her Majesty, when in England, scarcely ever attends the public worship of her own Church; which makes it all the less credible that she should attend the public worship of a communion whose creed is an insult to her faith. Really the Lord Chamberlain ought to see to this, and to take care that Her Majesty's subjects are not misled and offended by misrepresentations of so palpable a character."-John Bull, Sept. 21, 1850.

served to them the cheap indulgence of their love of titular glory, grated on his fine sense of justice. It dealt out one measure to the Catholic-another to the Protestant. Dr. Lee took further exception to Dr. Muir's resolutions on the ground that they contained no recognition of a Roman Catholic's right to equal toleration with a Protestant. But Dr. Muir and his friends had no notion of a Roman Catholic being tolerated at all. To grant the same rights to a Papist as to a Presbyterian was, in their view, an act of grievous wickedness.

At a later meeting of Presbytery, the reverend brethren got on the Maynooth Grant. Dr. Lee said he had been in favour of the grant as a matter of policy. He was bound, however, to admit that the policy had failed. He found the priests no better than they were before— obstructing the useful career of the Queen's colleges, and resisting the progress of education and knowledge. The grant had become a grant in aid of the spread of Ultramontanism. He thought, therefore, it might very well be withdrawn. Dr. Muir could not let this pass. He rose to deprecate any opposition to the Maynooth Grant on the worldly ground of "policy." The grant was to be opposed only on the ground that to continue it was a breach of Protestant principle, and a "flagrant

It was of little use to discuss Papal Aggression in the very home of such sentiments as these. Dr. Lee made his contribution to the universal theme in the shape of a "Discourse on Papal Infallibility,"† in which he tried

* Scotsman, Feb. 28, 1852.

"Thou art Peter: a Discourse on Papal Infallibility and the causes of the late Conversions to Romanism. Edin. 1851."