were told, that some private person in England, had bequeathed a sum of money to that Congregation of the Established Church of Scotland, who should first break through the prejudices of education, and introduce an Organ into the Public Worship of God. And that now the time was come, when some enlightened, liberal, and spirited citizens of Glasgow, were determined to gain this bequest. Prudent people might, perhaps, be disposed to say, that such conduct would be rash, but surely none will deny, that it was a bold conception for the Minister and Congregation of St. Andrew's, to imagine that they alone were capable of removing the religious prejudices of a whole nation, and triumphing over the early habits and education of their countrymen? This report, however, began in September, 1806, to appear something more than idle rumour. For we were informed, that a petition from the Congregation of St. Andrew's, accompanied by a letter from their Minister, had actually been sent to the Magistrates and City Council of Glasgow, craving liberty to remove certain seats in that Church, for the accomplishment of their plan-the introduction and use of an Organ in Public Worship. But as we were also informed, that not only the prayer of the petition had been refused, but that likewise it had been strongly recommended to the Petitioners, to be cautious of venturing upon such a measure without first consulting their Ecclesiastical Superiors, we flattered ourselves that their en

thusiasm would, in due time, subside, and that by gentle and delicate treatment, the persons labouring under this Musical frenzy, would be restored to their senses; and that the Presbytery of Glasgow would never be called upon to exert their authority, to convince any Minister or Congregation of the Established Church of Scotland, of the impropriety of following what many would reckon divisive courses, to convince them that the uniformity and purity of our Public Worship, must not be sacrificed to a blind rage for innovation, which is unhappily so characteristic of the present times.

But we had augured wrong:-not reflecting to what length an enthusiasm for Music will carry its votaries; for there are fanatics in Music, as well as in Religion.

When we were told, that during last summer, not only the young, the gay, and the idle, but likewise the old, the grave, and the busy, repaired in the evenings to St. Andrew's Church, to improve themselves in Sacred Music, we became apprehensive, lest in that gaiety of heart which Music is said to inspire, they might be prompted to overstep the line of conduct which prudence and good sense should have taught them to observe. Unfortunately our apprehensions were too soon verified. But when an Organ had actually been introduced into St. Andrew's Church in Public Worship upon the 23d of August last, though not a little surprized at the change which had taken place in

Glasgow, in matters relative to religious Worship, and not a little astonished at the perseverance of the Gentlemen who seem to have framed and directed the measure, the Presbytery did not utter a single whisper against the private character or public conduct either of the Minister or Congregation of St. Andrew's. They never attempted, by dark insinuations, to stir up the people to oppose the measure, either in word or in deed. They never attempted by scurrilous poems-by insidious paragraphs in newspapers-nor by anonymous pamphlets-to pervert the judgment, or poison the mind of the public. When the business was brought before them in their judicial capacity, by the Chief Magistrate of the City, (whose bounden and sacred duty it is to take care that the uniformity and purity of Public Worship be preserved, and all abuses reformed, and for performing which sacred duty the Lord Provost has been so unjustly calumniated,) the same forbearance and lenity marked every part of the Presbytery's conduct. They did not even enter upon the discussion, conceiving that Dr. Ritchie would reflect seriously upon the consequences, and kindly save them from the disagreeable task of even appearing to wound his private feelings, in the discharge of their public duty to God and their Country. Nay, even upon the 7th October, so condescending were they, that it must be remembered by Dr. Ritchie, that every honourable attempt was made by the Presbytery to have the matter settled,

before they proceeded to the business of the day. It was even proposed to expunge from the Presbytery record every word which had any relation to this singular business, if Dr. Ritchie would but give the Presbytery any reasonable pledge that he would never again agitate the subject. But he could not be prevailed upon to say any more than what he had already said upon the 2d of September, "that he would not again use an Organ in the "Public Worship of God, without the authority of "the Church."

The Presbytery, however, reflecting on the cavalier manner in which they had been treated by that Gentleman, (never having been consulted by him, either directly or indirectly, when he first introduced it) were determined that they would not allow themselves to be hoodwinked, by such a vague and unsatisfactory pledge. They were determined not to suffer such a palpable innovation to creep into the Church of Scotland. They considered it as their sacred duty, to pass a judgment upon the illegality of the measure, and to set the question for ever at rest, at least with the Congregations under their jurisdiction. They, with regret, perceived that lenient measures had produced no good effect; and that nothing but decisive measures could bring some people to their senses. But instead of calling Dr. Ritchie as a party, they allowed him to sit, and speak, and vote, as one of the constituent members of the Court. He sat

and spoke, though he declined voting: and he must perfectly recollect, that during that long and spirited debate there was not even an ill-natured or indelicate remark made upon his particular conduct, as a Gentleman or as a Minister. And if any general reasoning upon the part of the Presbytery, pressed kard against his favourite measure, he had no right to complain. Every member of Court was perfectly entitled to use the most plain and energetic language int the discharge of his duty. But while it was their determined object to condemn the measure, it was their wish to save their Brother. They knew well that they were entitled to have sisted him as a party. This, however, from motives of delicacy, they most studiously avoided. And whatever now that Gentleman may think of their conduct, their object was solely to convince the world, that Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God in the Church of Scotland, was illegal and unconstitutional, and yet to forgive the mistake or the fault of their Brother.

The Presbytery who passed that judgment upon the 7th October last, did not do it in a corner, or with shut doors; what they spoke, and what they did, they spoke and did in the presence of numbers of the best informed and most respectable inhabitants of the City of Glasgow. Both the Dissentients and the Presbytery pressed their arguments with accuteness and with vigour, yet there was not a single sentiment uttered which could give the least offence to the Congregation of St. Andrew's. Their wishes.

b