the most secret. Were the catalogue of them now brought before man, you would blush and be confounded; how much more dreadful will be the shame, and sorrow, and everlasting contempt attendant on a judgment-day. O that you would listen, and fear, and turn to the Lord with penitent hearts, that iniquity may not be your ruin. 3. From the subject we may infer the wisdom of the people of God. They may have tribulations in this world, they may be reviled and persecuted by men, but the sound of the happy sentence of their Lord and their Judge will for ever banish all these miseries, and show that they have indeed chosen the good part which shall not be taken from them.

QUESTIONS ON THIS ESSAY. WHAT is the subject? What is the text? What argument does reason afford for a judgment? What says conscience? What changes in creation shall attend judgment? Who is the Judge? Who are the parties? What mean small and great? What books shall be opened? What shall be the sentence? What are the inferences?

'A PRAYER ADAPTED TO THIS ESSAY.

THOU Great Judge of the quick and the dead, impress our minds deeply with the solemnities of a judgment-day. May we often anticipate the day when the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat: and seeing that all these things shall be dissolved, Lord teach us what manner of persons we ought to be in all holy conversation and godliness. Give us grace to come to thee as a Saviour, and accept thee as our Prophet, Priest, and King, that our Judge may thus be our friend, and, before an assembled world, acknow ledge us as his own. As we all shall stand before the judgment-seat, as the small and the great will be there, O teach all ranks and conditions of men to set God before them, and prepare to meet him on his throne. All things, O Lord! are ever naked and open before thee, with whom we have to do. Sprinkle our hearts with the blood of Christ from an evil conscience, that our own hearts may not condemn us at the great day. Give us deliverance from the curse of the law, by him who was made a curse for us. Lead us to the light of the Gospel, that in it we

may find the record of our peace. Show us that our names are written in the book of life, as elect, believing, penitent, loving, and obedient children of God. And may we at last hear thee say to us, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. O! let the prospect of a coming judgment be a terror to evil-doers, to rouse them from their slumbers, and an encouragement to all thy children to be followers of them who, through faith and patience, are inheriting the promises. And now to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, be all the glory and kingdom, world without end. Amen.

---

AUTHENTIC REPORT OF THE SPEECH OF THE REV. DR. COOKE, IN THE CASE OF CLOUGH, COUNTY DOWN.

[We publish the following Speech, because it refers to a subject which is of common concern to the Ministers and Congregations of the General Synod of Ulster, and because it points to some original principles in Presbyterianism, of which it is well that they should be reminded.-EDIT.]

(FROM THE BELFAST NEWS-LETTER.)

FOR the elucidation of this case we think it necessary to prefix the following brief statement, extracted from the newspapers and religious publications of the day.

Some time previous to the Synod at Lurgan, 1829, a poll for a Minister took place in the Congregation of Clough, and the candidate was unsuccessful. The laws of the General Synod of Ulster forbid Presbyteries to order a second poll without special leave. On application for this leave, the Synod, according to a standing rule of their discipline, removed the congregation from the superintendence of the Bangor Presbytery, and placed it under the care of a temporary committee. Upon this the friends of the candidate seceded from the Synod and joined the Presbytery of Antrim, a body professedly of Arian sentiments, and unconnected with the Synod in doctrine, discipline, or jurisdiction. The opponents of the candidate adhered to the Synod. Each party claims the right to the Meeting-house and royal endowment. And this question is now pending before the Synod, the Law Courts, and the Government. Cases of this description come ordinarly before the Synod by a memorial, and Commissioners, and are then discussed by the members.

The memorial having been read, Dr. Cooke presented himself to the attention of the Synod. This case, he observed, must, in all its facts, be fresh in the recollection of the house; and the several particulars had been so openly before the public, that he would not waste their time with any repetition. There was, however, one item of some importance to the present statements, as it served to show the unaccommodating disposition with which the matter had been commenced by the Presbytery of Antrim, and still more important to some former statement, because, if

he well recollected, it had been publicly denied. He would therefore call upon Mr. Allen, who had been appointed by the Synod's Committee to preach in Clough, he believed in August, 1829, to declare whether he did not find that the Presbytery of Antrim had taken possession of the pulpit on the Sabbath morning, about two hours previous to the ordinary time of worship, and whether they did not refuse him liberty to read in the Meeting-house a common notice to the congregation?

Mr. Allen said, that he had gone down from Belfast in the coach with a member of the Antrim Presbytery, who, he found, had been sent to preach in Clough. They mutually explained their business, and an understanding was entered into, that no attempt should be made on either side to gain a premature possession of the pulpit. On going to the Meeting-house, however, at the usual hour, he was surprised to find the pulpit occupied by two members of the Antrim Presbytery, one of whom was preaching. He claimed the pulpit in the name of the Synod of Ulster, but the claim was refused. He then sent in a message to the members of the Presbytery of Antrim, requesting an interview, but they gave him no answer. He then went in himself, and the members stated, that the reason of their having occupied the pulpit was, that they feared a tumult might otherwise have ensued. He replied, that he conceived he had not been treated kindly after the arrangement which had taken place. He then wished to announce to the people, that he would preach at some distance from the Meeting-house. One of the members of the Antrim Presbytery at length did announce it himself, but he would not permit him (Mr. Allen) to do it.

Dr. Cooke resumed. I wish it then to go forth to Presbyterian Ulster, that the members of the Presbytery of Antrim violated the engagement made upon the Saturday evening, by pre-occupying the pulpit upon Sunday morning; that they would not condescend to come out to speak with your Minister; and that they would not allow him to read an ordinary notice in the house of your forefathers. A few weeks after this usurpation, I was myself appointed to preach at Clough. I there found that the two parties held divine service in the open air, in the grave yard, and upon the opposite sides of the same house. Here I had commenced the service to a large congregation, when I received a message from two highly respectable Magistrates, who, fearing a conflict of the parties, requested my attendance, with a view to an amicable arrangement. In truth, there may have been reason to apprehend danger; for when the Arian Minister was on his way to the place of Meeting, I was proceeding at the same time, and one of his people repeatedly assaulted me, by crossing the road offensively before me, and pushing and trampling on me in passing. I bore it silently, knowing that patience and forbearance are the best weapons of our warfare. It is but justice to say that his Minister took no part with him, but, if I well remember, endeavoured to restrain his insolence. When before the Magistrates, I met the Minister and one of the Arian party; I also was accompanied by one of the Orthodox party. One of the Magistrates proposed arbitration on behalf of the Arian party, and to this I immediately assented, provided they would state the principle upon which the arbitration should be conducted. They answered me, they would leave the whole matter to the arbitration of two gentlemen. rejected this proposal, unless they would define the question for arbitraWhen pressed to consent to this indefinite and unmeaning proposal, I took the liberty of asking the Magistrate-if a person should come, lay

tion.

ingclaim to his estates in the county, and actually usurping their possession, whether he would, without previous arrangement, consent to leave the whole matter to an undefined arbitration? He acknowledged he would not, but would, before he put his estates in hazard of any two men's opinions, first wish to know upon what ground the demand was made, and upon what principle they would decide his claims. The Synod of Ulster, I then observed, has here a spiritual estate, to which it has claims as valid as you have to your temporal possessions-valid by original destination-valid by centuries of uninterrupted possession-and we will not submit their claims to an indefinite inquiry: but, first, state and settle the question to be examined, and the principle of decision, and we are ready, at a moment's warning, to submit to arbitration. On this ground I am the more of common sense and commen justice I took my stand.

anxious to impress this point upon the Synod, and to bring it fairly before the public, inasmuch as we have been accused of unwillingness to settle by arbitration. The accusation I repel by this plain statement of facts, and for the truth of it I can fearlessly appeal to all the witnesses of the transaction.

When I found that I could obtain neither question nor principle for the proposed arbitration, but that I was required to put to sea without a chart, a rudder, or a compass, and to trust withal to the pilotage of persons in whose legal knowledge I could have little confidence; and feeling that, while I was acting upon my own weak judgment, I was yet forced into the responsible office of your representative, I continued, notwithstanding the opinion of one of the Magistrates, to refuse all compromise of your claims and rights, without a previous settlement of the question and principle of arbitration. Now this, you will perceive, so far from resisting arbitration, was, in my humble opinion, the only way to ensure its success. For why are arbitrations so often unsatisfactory and unsuccessful?--just because of the random and undefined manner in which they are undertaken.

When I found that I could not obtain such a definite settlement of question and principle as would enable us to proceed to arbitration, the Arian Representatives proposed to settle the matter by a suit at law. To this I could offer no objection; and, in the mean time, to prevent all collision of parties, I consented to the following compromise.

I must here state, that between the visit of Mr. Allen, and the time of which I speak, the Orthodox congregation had regained their original possession of the house, in consequence of the Arians leaving the key behind them. The Magistrates wished them to deposite the key with a member of the Established Church, until the question of claim should be settled. I confess I did consider that possession is a strong point of law, and felt by no means inclined to weaken this point; I did simply believe that every man is the best keeper of the key of his own house, and therefore I refused the surrender. I was told by one of the Magistrates that I was in error, and that the surrender of the key could not alter or weaken our claim. Having no knowledge of law, and convinced of the superior opportunities of the Magistrate, I entered at his request into the compromise to which I have already alluded, and which I shall now detail, viz.—The parties mutually agreed to abstain from occupying the Meetinghouse until the opinion of Counsel could be obtained, stating-whether the key could be surrendered and deposited with a third party, without weakening the alleged possession on the part of our friends; and if so, how it could be effected? I do confess that I considered the proposal a mere bubble, or a weak devise of the Arian party that could do us no

injury-besides my respect for the worthy Magistrate by whom the proposal was countenanced, induced me to consent, though I expected it to produce nothing. However, an Attorney upon each side was forthwith nominated, and I attended with some of the people of Clough to give instructions for case in all due form. How many "six and eight pences" the matter cost, I do not now remember; but I know the Attorneys, after conference, agreed that the question could not be proposed to Counsel, and so the matter ended. This point may appear insignificant, but there is nothing insignificant in a law suit; and there are two facts connected with it, to which I must direct the attention of the Synod.

First, when the Arian party purposed to submit the question to Counsellor Holmes, I had every reason, from their own statements, to believe they were already acting upon his opinion. I was fully aware, and I was instantly reminded, that he was a member of an Unitarian Congregation in Dublin-I knew he was the intimate friend of my deadliest enemies-nay, more, I knew from his own lips, he was my own personal enemy; yet, I agreed without hesitation to submit your cause to his decision; for, notwithstanding all these circumstances of bias, I believed him to be an honest man-I believed also your cause to be plain and good, and I did not fear for the result. You will see, after a little, how differently our Arian opponents acted, when the choice of Counsel became subject to their decision. The second circumstance to which I crave your attention is this—I am told, that in a libellous publication, which in the assumption desecrates the name of "Christian," we have been accused of having violated our engagement by entering again into the Meeting-house. Our Minister has twice attempted to take possession of the Meeting-house, but each time he has done so under legal advice-first, by the Attorney who knew the conditions of the agreement, and knew they had expired-then by Counsel, who considered the entry necessary to assert possession, after it had been, as he believed, illegally assumed by a bench of Magistrates, whose warrant to that effect was submitted to his inspection. Be it remembered then, that the agreement I made to abstain from possession was to continue till the opinion of Counsel could be obtained. Be it remembered, that our opponents determined not to ask this opinion. The condition of the bargain being thus relinquished, the bargain itself was relinquished; and when we entered on possession, it was not until the agreement to refrain having thus terminated by mutual consent, each party was free from every previous engagement.

I now revert to the period at which the Attorneys of both parties agreed that the opinion of Counsel should not be asked about surrendering the keys, and at which the Arian party served notices of ejectment against our Minister. Our Minister was now instructed by his Attorney to enter the Meeting-house on Sunday, for the purpose of worship, and, whilst acting upon this advice, the Arian Minister entered with his adherents, rushed up to the pulpit, seized our Minister by the breast, and thus interrupted and terminated the service of God. Our Minister then appealed to the Magistrates for protection, but they ruled that there had been no assauit. I impeach neither the heads nor the hearts of the Magistrates by whom this decision was pronounced. They had better means of judging-they are more competent to judge such matters than I am-and, so far as I am privileged to know any of them, I have the most profound respect for their character, and the most perfect confidence in their honor. But when I speak of this transaction, I impeach our ownselves of want of sympathy