the Rev. Heneage Horsley, to which his Majesty made a gracious reply; after which, having kissed his Majesty's hand, the deputation retired. I never heard that this marked respect to the Scottish bishops and clergy excited any particular jealousy among the other religious communions; and the particular instance alluded to, as respects the address, was the criticism upon it by a radical, semi-infidel newspaper, published in Edinburgh, called "The Scotsman," the writers of which chose to call it sycophantical, simply because it contained some allusions to the sufferings of the Scottish episcopalians for their attachment to the House of Stuart in former reigns. This writer also attempted to sow the seeds of discord and jealousy amid the general harmony which then prevailed, by insinuating that the Scottish bishops had some ambitious design of getting their church re-established in Scotland (!)—an insinuation, however, so absurd, that the veracity or sagacity of the writer acquired no great reputation for the assertion. The ministers of the Established church of Scotland know well, as do also the civil government, that the Scottish episcopal clergy are loyal and peaceable subjects, devoted to the institutions of their country; who, though differing from the Presbyterian church on the most vital points of the Christian institution, would rather defend it, as they have often done, than see it fall the prey of dissenters and sectarians. In short, the Presbyterian church knows that it is from those who have separated from it, and who yet hold, or profess to hold, the same doctrine as itself, namely, the Seceders and other Presbyterian dissenters, that it has most to fear. They have already given sufficient indications of their hostility to their mother Establishment by having recently formed a powerful combination, in the cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, for its overthrow. If, however, the radical critic of the "Scotsman" pronounced the address of the Scottish bishops and clergy to the King to be sycophantical, he went farther with his remarks on the address of the General Assembly, which he characterized as not only servile, but even blasphemous!

In 1825, however, an event occurred in the history of the church, of the greatest importance, which occasioned, at the time, no little controversy, and even acrimony, especially in England. This was the consecration of the Right Rev. Matthew Henry Luscombe, LL.D., Cambridge, as a missionary bishop to the continent of Europe. Dr. Luscombe, who was then, and still is, chaplain to the British embassy at Paris, having perceived, during his residence on the continent, the great laxity existing among the members of the church of England, and even among some of the clergy, occasioned by the want of episcopal duties and authority, came to England to consult with his friends how such a state of affairs might be rectified, and the dignity of the VOL. III.-March, 1833.

2 L

church maintained. By law, the Bishop of London has jurisdiction over all British chaplains and factories on the continent, and to his Lordship the clergy are amenable for their conduct; but this jurisdiction did not in the least correct the deficiencies which Dr. Luscombe stated to exist, namely, the total want of episcopal duties, and the impossibility that they could be procured. It was plain that the Bishop of London could not hold confirmations in France; and it was also plain that there were many English families in that country, not to mention French Protestants, who either resided for the most part there, or who were domiciled there altogether, or whose descendants still adhered to the communion of the church of England. These things being duly and seriously considered, Dr. Luscombe came to Scotland; and, after a full correspondence with the Episcopal college, was consecrated at Stirling, on the 22nd of March, 1825, by Bishops Gleig, Sandford, Skinner, and Low. The Rev. Walter Farquhar Hook, M.A., of Christ Church, Oxford, chaplain to his Majesty, and now vicar of the Holy Trinity, in the city of Coventry, preached the consecration sermon, which he afterwards published with an introduction and notes, and dedicated to the Scottish bishops. This event, as we have already observed, excited no little controversy in England, for and against the expediency of the measure; and the present Bishop of London commenced a correspondence with Bishop Luscombe on the subject. Bishop Luscombe was finally constituted by that prelate his commissary on the continent, by which appointment the Bishop is invested with a jurisdiction by the Bishop of London, to superintend all the clergy, chaplaincies, and factories, and report to his Lordship at stated periods.

In 1828, the primus summoned a synod of the church, which was held at Lawrence-kirk, in the county of Kincardine, in the summer of that year. The object of this synod was to revise and consolidate the canons of the synod of Aberdeen. Bishop Gleig, the primus, the Bishops of Edinburgh, Dunkeld, and Aberdeen, with the delegates of the clergy chosen from the dioceses, attended the synod; but Bishop Jolly of Moray and and Bishop Low of Ross and Argyle, either refused or hesitated to concur, on account of some peculiar objections which occurred to them on the subject. The synod, nevertheless, assembled, and revised the code of canons, which were ordered to be printed, and circulated among the clergy of the church, while the primus communicated the proceedings to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Some things, however, were overlooked in the business of this synod, which, added to the objections of Bishops Jolly and Low, caused the primus to summon a new synod, which was held in the city of Edinburgh in July, 1829, when all the members of the Episcopal College and the delegates of the clergy attended, and thus finished the revision of the canons, and rectified the internal government of the church.

In the beginning of the year 1830, the Right Rev. Daniel Sandford, D.D., Bishop of Edinburgh, died at his house in that city, in the 64th year of his age and 24th of his episcopate. This excellent and pious prelate, who was the son of the Rev. Dr. Sandford, of Sandford Hall, Salop, and who was born at Delville, near Dublin, was of Christ Church, Oxon. He was, as we have formerly shewn, the great means of uniting the English and Scottish ordained clergy, and presided over his important diocese with extreme mildness and moderation. The state of his health often prevented him from those exertions which are required of the head of a great and extensive diocese, but when not prevented from this cause, he uniformly discharged his episcopal duties with dignity, and with pious and apostolical fervour. He died respected and venerated by men of all parties and persuasions, who evinced their respect by their voluntary attendance at the last solemn offices of religion.

Bishop Sandford was succeeded in the episcopate by the Right Rev. James Walker, D.D., formerly of St. John's College, Cambridge, and Professor of Divinity in the Scottish Episcopal Church. Bishop Walker had previously held the cure of St. Peter's Chapel, in the city of Edinburgh, which, however, he resigned in 1829, and his highly respected and learned colleague, the Rev. C. H. Terrot, M.A., of Trinity College, Cambridge, became the sole pastor. Never was there an election to the episcopate in any age of the church which gave greater satisfaction than that of Bishop Walker. There was not a single dissentient voice; no other person was ever thought of by the clergy; their eyes, as well as those of the laity, were simultaneously turned to the bishop elect, and their only fear was that the then delicate state of the bishop's health would induce him to refuse. Fortunately, however, Bishop Walker yielded to the wishes of his clerical brethren, and he was consecrated at Stirling, on Sunday, the 7th day of March, 1830, by Bishop Gleig, primus, Bishops Jolly of Moray, Skinner of Aberdeen, and Low of Ross and Argyle. The consecration sermon was preached by the Rev. Dr. Russell of Leith, who on that occasion delivered a most eloquent discourse, which was afterwards published, entitled, "The Historical Evidence for the Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy."

Bishop Walker entered upon the duties of the episcopate by officially visiting all the congregations within the city of Edinburgh, Leith, Portobello, and the adjacent town of Musselburgh; in which latter place, it may be remarked, there has been an Episcopal congregation since the year 1688. The minister of that town, or rather of the parish of Invererk, in which the town is situated, was, at that period, the Rev. Arthur Millar, who was ejected from his benefice, and was afterwards consecrated a

bishop. Bishop Walker, in the summer of 1830, visited every congregation in his diocese, which, besides the county of Midlothian, comprehends also the counties of Fife, Haddington, Roxburgh, Dumfries, Peebles, Lanark, Renfrew, and Stirling, confirming most of the congregations in these counties, and holding a primary visitation of the clergy in the different districts.

Since the consecration of Bishop Walker, no event of any importance has occurred in the history of the Scottish Episcopal Church, if I except the institution of the Gaelic Episcopal Society, which will be subsequently noticed. Here, then, must I conclude this sketch, with a simple but fervent aspiration for our humble church,-Esto perpetua! In my next and concluding paper, I shall lay before the reader an account of the dioceses, the internal government, and modes of proceeding of the Scottish Episcopal clergy, and then describe the various institutions connected with the church.

THE SABBATH.

THAT business and labour almost unceasing are characteristic of every class of society in England, cannot, I believe, be gainsaid. We are all very busy, enterprising, full of engagements and occupations; the spirit of Trade has drawn into its neverresting course every temper of mind and every order of the people the over-wrought statesman, lawyer, author, the long and severe day of the mechanic, and raged even unto death of body and soul among the poor children of the factories. This aspect of the nation everywhere intruding its restless energies upon our notice, leads the mind to consider and to feel strongly the virtue and blessedness of REST, and the wisdom of the Jewish polity which so remarkably commanded and enforced it. That this precipitancy of life among us is a great cause and consequence of unsound knowledge, mediocrity of art and character, and of vulgar and unhappy feeling, I am well persuaded; and could we mitigate this thirst for action, business, and legislation, and impress upon some few at least the assurance of the poet that

"God doth not need

Either man's work, or his own gifts; who best

Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best: his state

Is kingly; thousands at his bidding speed,

And post o'er land and ocean without rest;

They also serve who only stand and wait"-(MIlton,)

or from the stronger and safer language of a prophet convince them that

"Their strength is to sit still,"-(ISAIAH xxx. 7,)

the consequences would be most beneficial and blessed. In the Mosaic legislation the very land itself was commanded by God to enjoy this refreshment of tranquillity and repose; and because this law was forgotten, we read that the Jews (Judah) were taken into captivity" until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths, for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath to fulfil three score and ten years."-2 Chron. xxxvi. 21. Thus to compensate her, and to punish them, was there bestowed a decimal week of sabbatic years upon her, the enjoyment of which she had been defrauded of by their avarice and disobedience.

elements

But now "the priesthood being changed, there becomes a change also of the law;" the seventh day is still sanctified, but to a purer and a nobler rest: the body is in repose only that the soul may live the more in the stillness of meditation and the gentleness of charity, and, by cherishing an unanxious, unworldly, and spiritual life, make every day to become a sabbath. Ere we can believe ourselves at all approaching to this Christian condition, it would be natural to mark some mitigation taking place of the ardent businesses, exhausting both soul and body, to which our commercial avidity, our utilitarian faith, and our secular dependencies at present so inexorably bind us. Ere the blade can spring up some decay must take place in the earthly seed, something (at least equal we would hope to the "beggarly of Judaic forbearance and mercy) to check the toil of agriculture and the cupidity of mammon. But Christian England seems far from allowing any such Mosaic restraints and festivals to break its confidence in the energies of its own selfdepending and unresting arm of flesh. Could some moral atmosphere be spread about her that would uplift and retain the holy and refreshing dews of the sabbath-days, so that they might fall and shed some little sprinklings of coolness upon the restlessness and fever that absorb so exclusively all the intervening ones, how gradually then would there find its way among us, in the place of our own multiscience, that simpler and quieter wisdom whose nature is "pure and peaceful," and which imposes upon its servants a "light burden" and an "easy yoke." Health and joy would be seen in the infant prisons, or rather lazar-houses, of our manufactories; and a more cheerful and happy spirit soon enliven the exhausted sensibilities of our agricultural poor. The attainment of this blessing among our once healthful and warm-hearted peasantry, by raising a little the shoulder from the burden, has been but little spoken of, though felt to be so desirable by those who are dwelling among them. I would gently advocate it by selecting a remote and pleasing, rather than a nearer and more painful picture in illustration.

The village churches in which my lot had appointed me to be