that the ministers, to whom they open a door of usefulness, will be restrained from giving offence to their brethren, or to patrons, while theyn aturally look forward to charges on the establishment as more eligible than those they hold. On these and similar grounds, the popular party have defended, their attachment to Chapels of Ease, and, in many instances, their exertions have been attended with success.

Into these views Dr Johnston zealously entered. In particular, in the Assembly 1779, when he began to take an active part in the conduct of business, he contributed to the triumph of his friends over the opposition made to the admission of the chapel at Dunfermline, and of Lady Glenorchy's at Edin burgh, into the bosom of the church. Many years have elapsed since the decisions in these causes were pronounced; and it cannot with truth be said, that they have produced effects unfavourable to the interests of religion, or to the peace of the country.

But the powers that be, still regarding such erections with a jealous eye, or anxious for

uniformity in decisions respecting them, turned their attention, a few years ago, to the construction of a general law by which they should be governed. It was formerly com petent for presbyteries, in the first instance, to authorise the erection of Chapels of Ease within their own bounds. But in the year 1798, it was enacted, that they should be permitted to take only certain preliminary steps, and that a final judgement should not be given without the special directions of the Assembly. To the passing of this law, it was objected, that it did not accord with the general spirit of the constitution, which invested presbyteries with the power of judging, in the first instance, in all matters within their own bounds; powers which could not be formidable, because their sentences might,. by dissent or appeal, be brought under review, and reversed, if found to have been wrong; that if the practice of the Assembly's acting as a radical court, instead of a court of review, should be introduced, they might in time be loaded with more business than they could possibly overtake; that in

cases attended with no doubt or difficulty,, parties having interest would be subjected unreasonably to trouble, expence, and delay; and that reluctance to these might lead many to withdraw themselves from the church, who, otherwise, might have continued in its communion. But these and other objections were over-ruled. The law was passed, and must be obeyed. It is of too recent a date to render it possible to argue from experience on its wisdom and utility.

Another question of general concern has of late years been no less keenly agitated. The constitution and laws of the church prohibit plurality of benefices and the non-residence of the clergy. No attempt has yet been

made to unite two or more ecclesiastical benefices in the same person. But it has been held that the emoluments provided by law are too scanty to rouse and reward the exer tions of men of genius; and that, therefore, it is expedient that some of this description should be permitted, along with their pastoral charges, to fill chairs in the universities. It cannot be denied that there are some of

these academical situations which clergymen are best qualified to fill, and that there are some clergymen, who, by their local situa tion, abilities, and diligence, are able to fill them without neglecting, or performing in a careless or superficial manner, the duties of their sacred office. But when the literary or scientific employment to be assigned, is altogether uncongenial with their proper studies; when it is such as is calculated to fill up the whole time of any ordinary man; when it would remove him for a considerable part of the year from the flock of whom he hath taken the oversight, it has to many appeared to be their bounden duty to resist the measure. They have thought it unconstitutional that a professor in a university should be permitted to accept of a parish at a distance from the seat of the university, or that a minister in such a parish. should receive an academical chair without resigning his parochial charge.

No new legislative provision has been proposed; but various cases have been brought forward in which the principles in question

have been involved. In the discussions which have taken place, our author had opportunities of exerting his powers, and of defending what he conceived to be the best interests of the church. He had no predi lection for levelling doctrines, but he considered the charge of souls as too weighty to be sacrificed, in any instance, to the temporal advantage of any individual, however wore thy of promotion, and was anxious to repress that ambition which might exalt a few above their brethren, or prove the engine of creating an undue influence in the church.

In the trial of private causes, which oc cupy a considerable portion of the time and attention of the ecclesiastical courts, he acted as became an upright and impartial judge, In the application of law, he discovered great acuteness and candour, and delivered his opinion and his vote, without respect of persons, according to the light of his own mind. On such occasions he derived peculiar ad vantages from his superior knowledge of those forms which are the handmaids of justice, from the facility with which he