SCOTLAND.

- There was a tea-party at Edinburgh, in the Waterloo Rooms, on Thursday sennight, to receive the deputation of the Anti-Corn-law League ; now joined by Mr. John Bright. The meeting was attended by about eight hundred persons, including ladies. Mr. D. M`Laren consoled himself for the admitted fact that there are not many great political names identified with the cause of total and immediate repeal, by the reflection that such men are becoming leaders with almost no- body to lead, and if they wish to lead they must follow their friends. Mr. Cobden professed to submit the question of Corn-law Repeal, as one between the manufacturers and landowners, to Edinburgh, the com- munity which of all parts of the United Kingdom is by its position and interests the best fitted to take a calm dispassionate view of the case. Observing that there no longer remains any argument to meet out of doors, he anticipated the tactic to which the opponents of Repeal would resort in the ensuing session of Parliament-

" Shall we find our opponents in the House of Commons get up and maintain the justice of the Bread-tax ? How will our opponents deal with this question in the House of Commons? The subject must be discussed there—it must at least be brought upon the floor of the House. How will our opponents meet it ? Will they give a silent vote on the question ? I think they won't dare to do that. Will they meet the Total Repealers in argument ? I will venture to say they will never meddle with it. The only chance of Sir Robert Peel will be to fasten upon those men who go into the House under the guise of Free- traders, and who advocate monopoly under that sinister disguise. These are the men whom Sir Robert Peel will fix upon as his great opponents. But depend upon it, neither be nor any others will meet the Total Repealers in argument. Does not this show the importance of the Free-trade party being united in argument before approaching the House of Commons ? Are we not bound to consider what is right and what is wrong ? to make up our minds before we go i there ? to leave no chink or crevice in our armour which the wily sophist who is now at the head of our affairs may prove ?"

At the close, subscription-papers were handed round, and "a con- siderable number of names and subscriptions were received."

The deputation have also visited Leith, Fifeshire ; Dundee, where they were received at a meeting of 1,500 persons ; Forfarshire ; Perth, where new municipal honours awaited them ; Stirling ; and again Glasgow. At Stirling, the number of guests at the banquet got up for the occasion was 1,500 : Mr. Murray of Poluaise, a large landed proprietor and an agricultural authority, presided, and Mr. Fox Maule was among the guests. The meeting in Glasgow, on Tuesday, was held under the auspices of the Young Men's Free- trade Association ; and the assemblage and proceedings were, says the Glasgow Argus," if possible, still more enthusiastic and exciting" than those at the banquet on the previous Wednesday. At this and the Stirling meeting there was a plentiful admixture of ladies. At the latter, Mr. Fox Maule announced the concurrence of his father-in- law, Lord Abercromby, in the present movement.

We proceed to give a fuller account of Sir James Graham's letter to the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, which we were only able to mention last week. He says that the claim of right and the anti-patronage addresses to the Queen and the memorial to Government had been anxiously deliberated upon. He remarks that the contents of both addresses are studiously combined in the memorial ; and accounts for the previous silence of Government by the hope that the unreasonable demands of the Church would be revised. The re- fusal of an answer to the demands now put, however, might be con- sidered disrespectful- " The allegation is now distinct, that ' the constitution of the country has been broken, and that vested rights and privileges, secured by statute and solemn national treaty, have been violated.' " The question at once arises, when, and by whom?

" I look for the date in the protest and declaration of right ; and I find no cause of complaint even alleged prior to the year 1834—except, indeed, the statute passed in the 10th of Anne, which restored to patrons the right of presentation, which has regulated the exercise of this right for more than a century, and which until 1384 commanded for many years the tacit assent of the General Assembly itself. "But some 'encroachment ' has been committed_ in violation of a national settlement.

" Did Parliament interfere ? Did the Civil Courts make some aggressions on the spiritual jurisdictions of the Church ? Quite otherwise."

This leads to a rapid glance at the Veto Act of 1834, and to a re - flection- " The history of other times and of other churches presents to us numerous instances in which those intrusted with spiritual power have sought to extend their privileges, and have advanced maxims totally incompatible with civil government. They have been disposed in times past to take it for granted, as a point incontestable, that their cause is the cause of God; that in resisting the civil authorities they are suffering for conscience' sake; and not only that in all causes spiritual they are the sole judges, but that they alone are competent to determine what is spiritual and what is " Pretensions such as these have heretofore been successfully resisted by the sovereigns and people of this realm ; nor could they be conceded without the surrender of civil liberty, and without the sacrifice of personal rights."

He cites the law of the case, remarking that the collision of inde- pendent civil and spiritual jurisdictions can only be avoided by modera- tion on both sides-

" Whether a particular matter in dispute is so entirely spiritual as to fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Church Courts, or whether it involves so much of civil right as to bring it, to a certain extent, within the jurisdic- tion of the Civil Courts, may often be a difficult question : but it is a question of law, and questions of law are decided in the courts of law, and questions of jurisdiction are also decided there; all subject to an appeal to the House of Lords, which includes within itself the highest judicial authorities, and which is able to command the opinions of those who are trusted with the power of deciding on the civil rights, the liberties, and the lives of their fellow-subjects. " Disputed questions of jurisdiction must be determined ; and her Majesty's Government cannot advise any departure from fundamental principles, any devolution to the General Assembly of an independent irresponsible authority competent to decide, without appeal, what are the boundaries of civil and spiritual jurisdiction, and, therefore, what are the limits of its own power."

The train of reasoning adopted by the Assembly, he remarks, leads directly to despotic power; and he quotes against them the standard authorities of the Church-

" Appeals are solemnly made to the standards of the Church, books of disci- pline, directories, acts of Assembly, and all the depositories of ecclesiastical lore ; but one great maxim is overlooked—it is laid down in the Second Book of Discipline. I quote the words—` Diligence should be taken chiefly by the Moderator, that onlie ecclesiastical things be handlit in the Assemblies, and that there be na medling with ony thing pertening to the civill jurisdiction.'

" This is the maxim of a standard of the Church.

" The Confession of Faith is no less explicit—that Confession of Faith which forms part of the Revolution settlement, and which is embodied in the national Treaty of Union, so often the subject of reference. Again I quote the words as recorded in the statute-book= Synods and Councils are to handle and con- clude nothing but that which is ecclesiastical ; and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs, which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble peti- tion in cases extraordinary, or by way of advice for satisfaction of conscience, if they be thereunto required by the Civil Magistrate.' " Can it be justly denied that the patron's right pertains to the civil juris- diction, or that the Assembly, in passing the Veto Act, has intermeddled with civil affairs otherwise than by way of humble petition and advice?"

He reminds the Assembly, that they have pleaded before the Court of Session and the House of Lords, and only "refused to obey the compul- sion of an adverse decision." Moreover, the Church has "inflicted the seventies of her discipline, as in the case of the Strathbogie Presbytery, on ministers whose only crime has been obedience to what has been de- clared to be the law of the land."

" A Church established by law cannot quarrel with the courts of law and long retain its respect for the authority of Parliament. " The statute law is but the voice of the Legislature, the final declaration of its will. The Civil Court is the expositor of its intentions, the instrument whereby, its purpose is effected. If the statute of Anne were repealed tomorrow, and another law substituted in its place, disputed questions would arise, and the new statute in its turn, like every other statute—those included on which the establishment of the Church of Scotland rests—could only be enforced by the jurisdiction and decrees of those civil tribunals which are objects of jealousy to the Assembly, and whose judgments are presented as encroachments on spi- ritual power."

In resisting the right of patronage, Ministers believe that they are maintaining a right which is conducive to the welfare and stability of the Church itself; "a bond of amity which intimately connects the Church of Scotland with the head of the State "-

" The proposal of a transfer of the right of patrons to the people is indeed specious and attractive ; but, whatever might be proposed or intended, there is too much reason to apprehend that in no long time the whole power would fall into the hands of the Church itself,—a consummation which you will probably think with me would be no less injurious to religion than dangerous to the State."

Sir James enters into an analysis of the existing law, to show that the Church has ample power to prevent the admission of improper can- didates— " The licence, then, which precedes presentation, is in the power of the Church ; the examination and admission which follow it, and without which presentation is ineffectual, are fully conceded to the Church ; and unless it be contended that patronage itself must be either directly or indirectly abolished, the matter in dispute is reduced to narrow limits.

" The refusal to take the presentee on trials, under the operation of the

Veto Act, constituted in the Aucbterarder case the defeat and violation of the patron's legal rights. The statute is imperative; the presentee is entitled to be taken on trials. The Veto Act interposes an obstacle : this obstacle can be of no avail except in defiance of law ; and it is no answer to say that the Presbytery is an ecclesiastical body, for this is neither more nor lees than a claim for Churchmen of exemption from the duty of obedience to the statute-law." Alluding to " the hope of peace" in which Lord Aberdeen attempted legislation, and to his own advances to the Noniotrusionists last session, Sir James closes thus-

" The acts of the General Assembly, the claim, declaration, and protest, the address against patronage, the demand of the repeal of the statute of Anne, have unhappily diminished, so far, at least, as the Church is concerned, these reasonable hopes; and her Majesty's Ministers now understanding that nothing less than the total abrogation of the rights of the Crown and of other patrons will satisfy the Church, are bound with firmness to declare that they cannot advise her Majesty to consent to the grant of any such demand."

A meetinr, of the Special Commission of the Assembly was held on the 12th; when they agreed to a minute in reply to the letter from the Home Secretary. It is an able paper, expressed in language of guarded and dignified propriety. The Commission regret, that in Sir James's letter Government should have combined their answer to the claim of right and to the anti-patronage address, and treated as so entirely one matter the sultjects of the two documents ; for protection against the en- croachments of the Civil Courts in respect to the intrusion of presentees is absolutely essential, which the abolition of patronage is not, though patronage is a grievance. It is denied that the Church has ever put forward any such pretension as the claim to be the exclusive judge of its own jurisdiction- " On the contrary, she has uniformly disclaimed any such power of absolute and exclusive determination so as to bind other courts, or fetter them in any way in the regulation of their own conduct, according to their own conscien- tious conviction, in regard to the matters which they may have to decide. She has always maintained—and she has rested much of her case upon the plea— that all the several Supreme Courts of the kingdom, to which respectively be- long the adjudication of matters civil, of matters criminal, of matters fiscal, and of matters ecclesiastical, do each of them possess as of right, and must of necessity exercise, the power of determining for themselves respectively, and for the guidance of their own conduct, whether the matters brought before them, and the proceedings to be adopted by them thereon, be within the scope of their peculiar jurisdiction ; but, on the other hand, that no one of these courts can authoritatively impose its opinions on the others, deprive them of the free unfettered exercise of their judicial judgment for the regulation of their con- duct in matters coming before them, or coerce them into a course of procedure in such matters, not in accordance with their own conscientious convictions, but in accordance with the views of that particular court which seeks authori- tatively to impose its intrepretation of the law upon the others."

The Church only seeks that freedom from coercion of the Civil Courts which is recognized at once as belonging to the Criminal Court of Justiciary. Sir James Graham admits that the Church Courts alone can create the pastoral relation between the presentee and his parish— the Church does not claim more ; but, making the consent of the con- gregation a condition to that relation, she does not compel the Civil Cowls to hold that a valid ground of refusing to constitute the pastoral relation so as to regulate them in the matter which can be disposed of by them alone, the possession of the benefice. The Civil Courts, how- ever, have usurped a power which the State never conferred-

" Even if there were in this country one supreme tribunal of universal juris- diction placed over the several courts appointed in the first instance to exercise the different branches of judicial power, a complaint that this tribunal bad ex- ceeded the powers conferred on it by the constitution might properly be en- tertained, and if sufficient grounds were stated, ought to be entertained, by the supreme power of the State. No such tribunal, however, exists in this king- dom. The four great branches of jurisdiction—the civil, the criminal, the fiscal, and the ecclesiastical—belong to separate supreme tribunals independent of each other; the first three branches conferred, the fourth ratified by the State; and the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords extending only over two, the civil and the fiscal."

The Veto Act is vindicated on a distinction similar to that drawn above : the civil right of patronage is left to the unquestioned jurisdiction of the Civil Courts ; but when the presentee is once received, " an ex- clusively ecclesiastical process is entered upon, that of admission to the office of the ministry, and the creation of the " pastoral relation," both of which are expressly aemitted by the Secretary of State to be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Church-

" The statute,' observes the Secretary of State, is imperative. The pre- sentee is entitled to be taken on trials.' The statute, no doubt, says that the Church Courts shall be bound to receive and admit' qualified presentees; but it says nothing whatever as to taking on trials.' If it be imperative, the im- perative obligation, after the presentee is once ' received,' must be to ' admit' him. It has, however, always been held, and it is not disputed by ber Ma- jesty's Government, that the obligation to admit' is not absolute, but is only an obligation to admit according to the discipline of the Kirk.' " It is observed, that the authority of the House of Lords, sitting as a Court of Appeal, " cannot extend one hairbreadth beyond that of the Court whose sentence is reviewed "; and as to the Church's having pleaded before the Civil Courts, she did so under protest- " If the Legislature shall now, whether by express declaration or by tacit recognition in withholding redress against the alleged encroachments of the Civil Courts, recognize these Courts as authorized to declare its will as to the conditions of the Establishment, and the jurisdiction which it will acknowledge in its Courts, or substantially adopt their decisions, the Church will on her Part, doubtless, at once implicitly acknowledge them as authoritatively de- claring the law, and expounding the intentious of the Legislature. She will not, of course, perform her spiritual functions as the Civil Courts require, be- cause that would be to act contrary to her conscientious convictions as to the doctrines of the gospel; but she will acknowledge the obligation to do so to be now, though contrary to what has ever heretofore been held, a condition of the benefits and immunities of the Establishment • and being unable to comply with these conditions, she will be no longer at liberty to retain benefits and im- munities clogged with conditions which she cannot fulfil." The matter bad indeed been excluded from the cognizance of the Federal Legislature created by the Treaty of Union-

" But nevertheless, she, as a kingdom not of this world, has no warrant to contend against the supreme power of the State in regard to its own functions

in relation to the establishment of the Church, however wrongfully she may deem them to be exercised; and therefore, when the mind and will of the Le- gislature shall have been ascertained as to the conditions which they hold shall

henceforth be deemed those of the Establishment in Scotland, she will, doubt- less, while protesting, bow to that power, and if she cannot fulfil the conditions, yield up the benefits and immunities therewith clogged."

It is explained, that the Strathbogie ministers were not punished for\ obedience to the law, but for " their ultroneously continuing to exercise their spiritual functions after they were suspended by the Church, in contumacy of her authority:' Sir James Graham's profession of a sincere and unabated wish to heal the unhappy divisions which prevail are thus met-

" The Special Commission give full credit to this assurance, and appreciate the tribute to the usefulness of the Church with which it is accompanied. They deeply regret, however, that the only measures pointed to for that end are those which have already been proved Incapable of accomplishing it, by the decla- rations of the General Assembly, that these were inadmissible as a settlement of the great question now in issue."

An appeal will be made to Parliament-

" The views of her Majesty's advisers have now been received; but, whatever indications these may be considered to give of what may be expected from the Legislature, it is obvious, that with a view to the future actings of the Church, and, in particular, to the course that may be adopted by the next General Assembly, her claim of right should be brought under the consideration of Parliament. Since, therefore, it now appears that no measure such as will meet that claim will be submitted to Parliament by her Majesty's Government, it is necessary that the claim itself should be laid before it in the most formal and authoritative way in which thatcan be done during the interval between one Assembly and another. To the Special Commission it appears that this will be done most respectfully and effectually in the form of a petition, accompanied by the claim of right,' proceeding from the General Commission of the Assembly."

To that end, it is recommended that the Moderator should summon an extraordinary meeting of the Commission of Assembly for Tuesday the 31st instant.