disciples, petitions letters from the High Priest to the synagogues at Damascus, empowering him to seize upon any of that way whom he might find. On his way, however, the Lord appears to him in a vision; his eyes are opened to his error, and he is converted: and straightway in the synagogues, where he was seeking the followers of Jesus to persecute them, he is heard proclaiming him—that he is the Son of God.

After the conversion of Saul, the congregations through all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, being edified, had rest; and Peter, making a tour through them, confirms their faith and comforts them by various displays of the miraculous powers which he possessed. Still we have no intimation of any systematic organization having been introduced or commanded by the Apostles, in any or all of these congregations alluded to. They were composed so far, exclusively of Jews; and, from all we gather from the sacred narrative, held their public meetings in the Jewish synagogues, their accustomed place of worship. The term "elder," as a Christian officer, does not, up to this period, once occur; nor, with the exception of the appointment of the seven to attend to the distribution at Jerusalem, is there any mention made of a class like deacons. Christianity had evidently been, so far, in some sort consociated with Judaism, and made to partake of its restrictive and exclusive nature. But its author designed it for good news to all nations, and the time was now come for the barrier of Jewish prejudice to be broken down, and the gospel of God's free grace to overflow to the salvation of the Gentiles. Accordingly Peter's vision is sent; and, in the person and household of Cornelius, "the uncircumcision through the faith are justified." Soon we find some of the dispersion, who were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, announcing the glad tidings concerning the Lord Jesus, to the Greeks of Antioch; and multitudes are turned to the Lord. Their conversion is followed by the proper fruits of benevolence; and in the account given us of their liberality to the poor saints of Jerusalem, we have the first allusion, made in Acts of Apostles, to Christian elders. It is said they sent it to the elders by the hands of Saul and Barnabas. xi. c. 30 v. This incidental allusion not only shows that there were elders in Jerusalem, although we have no account of their appointment, but leads us also to the inference that the duties and relations of these officers were already familiar, and that they were well known and acknowledged at Antioch. How this could be we will hereafter inquire.

It is scarcely worth while to detail the narrative of Luke further' to satisfy the mind that it was in Jewish synagogues that the Chris

tian dispensation struggled into life and full development. Even after the introduction of the Gentiles this was the case. At Salamis Paul proclaimed the word of God in the synagogue of the Jews; at Antioch, in Pisidia, it was in a Jewish synagogue that Paul, after the Jews rejected the gospel, proclaimed, "Lo, we turn to the Gentiles;" and it was in the same synagogue that "the Greeks, hearing this, rejoiced." And when Paul left this city and passed over into Iconium, we find him and Barnabas in the synagogue speaking to "a great multitude of Jews and Greeks, who believed." From Iconium Paul and Barnabas go to Lystra and Derbe, and thence return, revisiting the various cities in which they had gathered congregations, and constituting over them Elders. Here, let it be well noted, is the first allusion we have to the appointment or constitution of Elders; and it was in those congregations which Paul and Barnabas had gathered through "the door of faith which God had opened to the GENTILES." Acts xiv. 23-8.

These things being premised, it will be not only interesting to us, but necessary to a clear and full development of our subject, that we pause a little to consider the organization of a Jewish synagogue, and inquire what influence it may have exerted upon the organization of the Christian assemblies. To do this, however, would lengthen out this article too much for one number. We shall, therefore, postpone it for another month. Meanwhile we would acknowledge the receipt of various important practical queries in connexion with our subject, which we hope in due time to embrace in the general principles we shall develope. Whilst it would be both unwarranted and invidious for us to discuss particular cases of difficulty actually existing, it will nevertheless be our aim before we dismiss our inquiries, to develope, as far as we can, without any special allusion to them, the general rule of scripture in any that may be presented, leaving its application to those in each congregation whose business it is to watch after the souls of the flock, and preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.

W. K. P.

LETTERS FROM EUROPE-No. XXII.

My dear Clarinda-THE original plan of my letters from Europe has not been carried out. Every thing human is occasionally controlled by circumstances. I had hoped to give a regular consecutive narrative and notes in the order of my tour, and the dates of events.

But the violence to which I was subjected in Scotland made it necessary that I should yield to the new circumstances and pay a passing attention to matters of such grave and pressing importance. I am again obliged to allude to those matters, as the public both in the United States and Great Britain have expressed much interest in them.

You, if not all my readers, have been informed that the Reverend James Robertson, Secretary of the Scotch Anti-Slavery Society, when judgment went against him on the part of Lord Murray at a called court, immediately appealed to all the Lords in the Court of Sessions (Queen's Bench) at the November term, from the decision of Lord Murray. The trial came on November 20. A printed copy of the proceedings of the Court has been kindly forwarded to me by my faithful and much esteemed brother Robert Macdougald of Edinburgh. The same mail also brought me a letter from brother Alexander Paton, of Morris Place, Glasgow, whose character is well known to you. From these documents we learn the following particulars. And first the decision of the Court of Sessions on the appeal:

20th November, 1847. FIRST DIVISION.-(W. G. T.)

No. 11.-The Rev. ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, Suspender, v. the Rev. JAMES ROBERTSON, Respondent.

Meditatio Fuga----Competency----Damages---Process ----Circumstances in which, while the Court would not decide as to the competency in the general case of a meditatio fuga warrant proceeding on the statement of an illiquid claim of damages, it was found that the statement of the claim of damages, as given in the petition, was not sufficiently specific to authorize such warrant.

Where the application for a meditatione fuga warrant was founded on several claims of damages stated cumulatively, one of which was thought to be sufficiently specific, while the others were not, the Court would not take any distinction, but refused the petition absolutely.

On the 31st August, 1847, the Rev. James Robertson presented a petition to the Sheriff of Lanarkshire, showing—

"That the Rev. Alexander Campbell, President of the Bethany College, Virginia, United States of America, on the 25th of August current, published in the newspaper published in Edinburgh of that date, called the 'Edinburgh Journal,' a letter addressed to the editor of the said journal, containing a number of false and slanderous statements highly prejudicial to the private character of the petitioner, and calculated to injure his usefulness as a minister of the gospel: that a copy of the said newspaper is herewith produced: that the said Alexander Campbell, at different places, both in public and in private, has made statements regarding the petitioner of a slanderous and calumnious nature, and calculated to injure him, both privately and as a minister: that the petitioner estimates the SERIES III.- -VOL. V.

9

damage which he has sustained as aforesaid to the sum of £5000 sterling: .... that the said petitioner is in course of raising an action for damages and for solatium against the Rev. Alexander Campbell for the injury sustained from said slanderous and defamatory statements."

The petitioner then stated his belief of Mr. Campbell's intention to leave Scotland, and the prayer concluded for warrant for the apprehension of the Rev. Alexander Campbell as in meditatione fuga, and his imprisonment until he should find caution, "to abide the issue of any action to be instituted at the petitioner's instance for damages and solatium for said false, slanderous, and defamatory statements."

The petitioner, in his oath, deponed

"That the Rev. Alexander Campbell complained upon, is justly due and indebted to the deponent a sum of £5000 damages, for the injury the deponent has sustained at the hands of the said Rev. Alexander Campbell by the published letter referred to, and by statements made in lectures in Scotland."

Mr. Campbell, on being called up for examination, proposed several objections to the competency of the application, the nature of which will be seen from the interloculor of the Sheriff-Substitute:

"Glasgow, 3d September, 1847.-Having considered the foregoing objections and answers, and heard parties' procurators thereon, and resumed consideration of the petition, and whole procedure, in respect the petition and oath distinctly sets forth that a debt exists; that it has been contracted by the defender since he last came to Scotland; that it arises from slanderous and calumnious statements made in Scotland, both in writing and verbally; and that it amounts to the specific sum of £5000, in respect it is settled that a foreigner is subject to the operation of a meditatio fuge warrant and liable to be attached for Scotch debts, if contracted since his last arrival, in respect the newspaper containing the alleged written calumny referred to, and founded on in the petition, has been produced therewith, and in respect it was decided in the case of Wright, 6th February, 1782, Mor. 5853, that it is sufficient for a party appearing for a fuge warrant to make oath that a claim exists, and that he thinks it well founded, and that it is not necessary to produce with such petition evidence of the debt to justify the application; as respects the preliminary objections, and appoints the judicial examination of the defender to be proceeded with."

The petitioner having, by minute dated 4th September, restricted the caution to be found by Mr. Campbell to the sum of £200, the Sheriff adhered to the interlocutor of his Substitute, and warrant of apprehension and committal was granted accordingly. Mr. Campbell then presented a note of suspension and liberation to the Lord Ordinary on the Bills (Murray,) on which his Lordship pronounced the following interlocutor:

"13th September, 1847.-The Lord Ordinary having heard counsel for the parties, and considered the note, passes the note, and grants warrant of liberation as craved.

"Note.-It appears to the Lord Ordinery that there is no such

specification of debt as entitles the party to obtain a meditatio fugæ warrant. The oath says that Mr. Campbell, the person complained upon, is indebted to the deponent a sum of £5000 of damages for injury sustained by the published letter referred to, and by statements made in lectures in Scotland. This published letter referred to is said in the petition to contain 'a number of false and slanderous statements highly prejudicial to the private character of the petitioner.' This leaves it perfectly vague and matter of inquiry, what were the particular false and slanderous statements, or what had been said in the lectures which constituted the injury and debt; whether, in any case, a meditatio fnga warrant might issue on account of damages due for any slanders specified in the oath or petition, is a question which the Lord Ordinary does not feel himself called upon to decide; but he conceives that any statement so general as to make it matter of conjecture and examination, what are the particular slanders which form the ground of debt, cannot authorize such proceedings. In the case of Pratt v. Flett, (30th June, 1826,) there was something more nearly approaching to a specification of debt than in the present case.

The respondent reclaimed, and pleaded-That there is no incompetency in a meditatio fuge warrant, founded on a claim for damages. There was here sufficient specification of the debt; the newspaper was produced, and it must have been evident to any Sheriff that the letter published in it contained actionable matter. The caution required had been limited to £200, so as to obviate any undue oppression; and an action of damages at the instance of the respondent had now been raised.

The suspender answered―That it is not necessary to discuss the general matter of competency; the only question being, whether there was a sufficient specification of the debt? The suspender's letter filled a whole column of the newspaper, and, except from the summons of damages since raised, it was impossible to distinguish the particular slanders referred to; while the statements as to the slanders contained in lectures in various parts of the country, were altogether too loose to found any thing upon.

Lord Justice-General.-This is undoubtedly a very delicate question. But I have always thought that, in proceedings or warrants of this kind, the utmost care must be taken that every thing be perfect and complete. Now, has every thing been done here according to the rules of law? The petition sets forth, that the suspender published in the Edinburgh Journal a letter, "containing a number of false and slanderous statements, highly prejudicial to the private character of the petitioner, and calculated to injure his usefulness as a minister of the gospel." But it does not stop here; it goes on to state, that the said Rev. Alexander Campbell, at different places, both in public and in private, has made statements regarding the petitioner of a slanderous and calumnious nature, and calculated to injure him, both privately and as a minister;" and the damage is estimated at £5000. In this estimate the respondent founds, not only on the statements contained in the letters, but on all the statements taken together. Then the oath is to the effect, that the suspender "is justly due and addebted to the deponent a