Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

Now for the application of the principle laid down. The writer, I suppose, knows that the Society principally supported by the Dissenters in England, is the London Missionary Society-not because it acts as a Dissenting Institution, or promotes, in heathen countries, their peculiar views; but because its constitution is Catholic. On this ground it might, without presumption, be called the British Missionary Society.

The candid view, then, of the account would be as follows:

Amount received by the London Missionary Society from Scotland during six years, that is, from 1819 to 1825. (This is from the Reports.) About Amount contributed chiefly by the Friends of the London Missionary Society to the Scottish Missionary Society for six years, from 1819 to 1825.

£8,000

7,775 £ 225

Here the balance against the Dissenters in England is very small. The other sums, received by other Institutions in England, should not be inserted, till every means have been employed to get

*There is another error-small indeed when compared with the other--which I merely notice en passant: It will be found in summing up the Cr. side of the account. It is only £1,000. too much. I take some credit to myself for mentioning it, as it makes the English liable for £1,000. more! Perhaps it may be a typographical error. On the Dr. side there is

such an error of £360,

assistance from those to whose re

ligious Societies the Scottish peo+ ple have contributed.

It also appears from this statement, that while the London Missionary Society was receiving me twentieth part of her annual income from Scotland, the Scottish Missionary Society was receiving one eighth part of her annual income from England. This, perhaps, will be a new view of the subject to the "Friend of Missions;" but I cannot see why it should not be considered as more correct than his own.

Thirdly. He seems to take for granted, that the sums transmitted to England, to assist her religious Institutions, could have been as well, or better, spent in the north, among the religious Societies there; and that, perhaps, in future, the better plan would be, to be less liberal to the Societies of England, and keep more for themselves. Such is certainly the drift of his last paragraph.

The writer should have been aware that, as it regards some of the Institutions, if the money had not been sent to England, not one fiftieth part of the amount would have been given to Scottish Institutions. Nay, more than this: the friends of religion in Scotland must either have withheld assistance altogether from some important objects, or have sent the money to England. There were no Societies in Scotland that could, or did, at the time, promote the same objects: that, if they were to enjoy the luxury of doing good to some of the most important branches of Christian benevolence, the amount must be transmitted to the south. Here I allude particularly to the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Hibernian School Society, and the Translation department of the Baptist Missionary Society.

SO

Here, then, I affirm, especially

with regard to the Bible Society, the distinction of England and Scotland should cease. It is a British object-not Scotland contributing to England, but the united contributions of Great Britain and Ireland collected for promoting the same object, and which could be better done by one great Society, than by a separate Society in each county or kingdom. I view the contributions received by the Bible Society as coming, not from England, or Scotland, as such, but as the offerings of British Christians to aid the circulation of the word of God.

On this principle, the sum of £75,200., contributed by Scotland to the British and Foreign Bible Society, should be deducted from the amount against England. It was not one country laying the other country under obligation, but the north combining with the south to promote one great and glorious object, and which could be better effected by one, than by several independent Institutions. What I now say, regards the past. The future lies in obscurity; but I may be permitted to express a hope, notwithstanding present difficulties, that it will be thought better to act on the same plan for the time

to come.

On the principle alluded to, three-fourths of the contributions given to the Baptist Missionary Society should not be taken into the account against England, because that proportion of the sums given was for translations, to aid the operations at Serampore. The friends of religion in Scotland could not assist the translation of the Scriptures in India in any other way so that, of necessity, they had to give their contributions to the Baptist Missionary Society.

The same might be asserted of the Hibernian School Society. It is not helping England-not

giving funds to be expended in this country-but to establish and support Schools in benighted Ireland. Scotland should rather view this as discharging a debt to that ill-used country, than as an obligation conferred on England. Scotland does not possess an Institution similar to that of the Hibernian Society. Because she does not, would she withhold help from the sister island, merely on account of the Society in London being the channel through which she must convey her assistance? This she could not do. Why then debit the account of England with the amount sent for the relief of Ireland?

I leave this view of the subject with your readers, both in the North and South. I do not think my representation is unfair; but viewing it as a moral question, not as a mere financial arrangement,a mere commercial transaction; I cannot consider that England should be viewed as under obligation to Scotland, for all the sums that she has received for the various Institutions of this country. Contributions, sent for objects, which could not be promoted in Scotland, for if they could have been, one-half of the amount, would not have been committed to the care of Societies in London.

Let it be observed, that I apply this principle only to those Institutions, to which there is nothing similar in the North; and which are yet so important, that the Christians of Scotland deem it a privilege to assist them, though their head-quarters should be in London.

I consider that the same remarks do not apply to Missionary Societies, because there are similar Institutions in Scotland. It is here then, and here alone, that we should estimate the comparative liberality of the North and South. If this plan should be adopted, the following statement would come nearer

as if all of them had been treated unkindly by their brethren of the south?

the true comparative view, which
should be taken of the contribu-
tions of Scotland to England, and
vice versa.

The Amount sent to England
during ten years
For reasons above stated, de-
duct the Amount sent to the
British and Foreign Bible
Society

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

£150,000

75,200

£ 74,800

29,920

£ 44,880

17,052

£ 27,828

[blocks in formation]

tians who, we have seen,
within £225. of all which their
particular Society had received
from Scotland, without mention-
ing the £2,657. given to the Con-
gregational Union.

Fourthly. Does the writer of the Reply" wish his readers to understand that, on account of the treatment received last year, in London, by the Deputation of the Scottish Missionary Society, a feeling of discontent exists among the friends of all the various re

What should we suppose from his remarks? Nay, what is the avowed opinion of the writer? It is, that a great change must take place on the part of England, in the way of giving and receiving, or Scotland will see it necessary to withhold the greater part of her contributions.

Now, where does this discontent exist? Is it in the Committee of the Gaelic School Society; or does it appear in the Reports of the Congregational Union? No! it is only the Committee of the Scottish Missionary Society that has arraigned the religious public of England at the bar of their country, and given advice which could only be justified by a case of the greatest necessity.

SO

Whence has arisen this claim for equality of amount of contributions between the two countries, when the circumstances are of the Societies, and their expendifferent, as it regards the number diture? But is it an equality, or proportion equal to the expendi ture of the Institutions belonging to the two countries, that is wished? This already existsnay, more than exists. The folThe amount of contributions sent lowing comparison will prove it: from Scotland for six years, according to the statement of your correspondent, will be £90,000. The expenditure of the English Institutions so assisted during six years, will have been, at least, One Million. Thus, the proportion which Scotland has supplied will have been about one eleventh. Again, the amount received by the Scottish Institutions from

England during six years, was, at least, £14,000. The expendi

*The following are the items:

ligious Institutions of Scotland, The Scottish Missionary Society for six NEW SERIES, No. 17.

2 I

ture of the religious Institutions Scotland assisted during the same period is, as far as I can calculate from the imperfect documents in my possession, £83,000. The proportion, therefore, of this outlay which England has contributed, is about one sixth. What will your readers say to this view of the subject?-to this claim for equality? when, in proportion to the expenditure of the Institutions of the two countries, England has given nearly double what Scotland has, notwithstanding her liberality, which I am ready, and most happy, to acknowledge.

ance, and help you out of your difficulties." The Secretary was, at the same time, recommended to apply to one of the most estimable Scottish ministers in London, whose praise has long been in all the churches, for his advice and cooperation. What operation. This was done, and the result was, that the Secretary came to London, and made arrangements; and the Committee decided on sending a Deputation to England in the spring of 1819. A most respectable and efficient Deputation came to this country. It was most cordially received; nearly all the Dissenting chapels in London were opened to receive their ministers. They left London with upwards of £2,400., exclusive of what was obtained in some other towns. Here was a proof of a readiness to give assistance, when a case was made out that required it.*

It is but fair that your readers should know the occasion of the first application of the Scottish Missionary Society to the English public, and the very different. ground taken then, from that which is now done by its friends.

I happen to know the indivi-, dual with whom one of the Secretaries of that Society corresponded in the end of 1818. In a letter received by my friend, information was given respecting the heavy debt incurred by the Society, in consequence of the purchase of buildings in Russia for missionary premises; and he was asked if he thought the friends of Missions in England would give them any help, if a Deputation should be sent to the south. The reply, in substance, was, I believe, as follows: By all means, try; the friends of religion will, no doubt, give you assist

years, that is, from 1819 to 1825

But I wish your readers particularly to notice that, when the above Deputation visited England, under the pressing circumstances alluded to, it was distinctly urged, as a powerful addition to their claims, that it was owing to

* It is said, and I have heard the report on the best authority, that, when the Deputation returned to the north, after its successful mission, an opportunity was presented in Edinburgh of publicly stating the kind reception given to it in the south. One of the members of the Deputation did state, on the occasion, their obligations to the Scottish Presbyterian ministers of London and their congregations, and justly ; for they were liberal. But he made rather an awkward omission. He forgot to name their obligations to the Independents and Baptists, for their liberality on the same occasion, although nearly four-fifths of the whole sum was obtained from these nameless churches. The meeting would have broken up without knowing, from that address, that the Congregationalists had ever contributed to the Deputation at all, had means not been used to supply the, no doubt, unintentional omission. Some of the London ministers did hear of the circumstance; and it could not increase their £14,752 desire, on subsequent occasions, to admit the Deputations of that Society.

£7,775
2,657

[blocks in formation]

1,100

Gaelic School Society

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

900

720

900

their debt that they applied at all; and unless placed in somewhat similar circumstances, the visit would not be repeated, at least, for a considerable time. Such, I assert, was the understanding existing at that time. There was no intimation that an annual, or even biennial, visit would be paid. I do therefore think, under such circumstances, the passage in the Report was altogether uncalled for.

There was, indeed, at that time, a distinct recognition, on both sides, of the duty and advantage of mutual co-operation when needed; and I by no means say that it was wrong for them to repeat their visits. No! let them come annually, if they please; but let them not demand, in the name of Scotland, a more equal return from one particular body of English Christians, when all are liable for the debt, if it is to be viewed as such. If that Society be indeed the representative of all Scottish religious Institutions, let the appeal be universal; let it be made to all Denominations; let them procure a clergyman of the Establishment to advocate their cause in the endowed churches. Let the Methodists also do something; and let the unendowed churches do their duty. Let them present their claims in the name of Christ. Let them show that they have sent their missionaries to the most favourable stations, where doors of usefulness were opened, and where all the security which a free Government, and equitable laws, could give to their mission ary premises, and missionary labours, existed. They may not be able to boast of success; but this is not required. Let them show that they need help; that they are desirous to extend their operations; that they wish it to be indeed a Scottish Missionary Society, embracing all Denominations who hold "the truth in

love," and admitting them, without jealousy, into the direction of its affairs. This will guarantee the non-sectarian spirit of the Institution, and show that the only object is, to convey to foreign lands the knowledge of Christ. Let them also be able to show that they exerted themselves in the north, and that, in every part of Scotland where help could be obtained, they have procured it. Let all this be done, and England will do her duty. But before all this be done, let no charge be brought against a whole nation, or a particular Denomination in it, though on one occasion, in one city, the Deputation of one Society did not receive so much as its friends expected.

I say one Society, because I have heard of no complaint from any other Institution in Scotland; and with regard to one Society I can speak more decidedly. The Congregational Union of Scotland has sent several Deputations to England, and they have received important aid from Christians in this country; not, indeed, equal in amount to that given to the Scottish Missionary Society, but still considerable. The Committee of that union of churches and ministers have, privately and publicly, expressed their gratitude to their friends in the south, for the liberal assistance received from them. I cannot do better than refer to the resolution on this subject, passed at the meeting of the Union, after their first Deputation returned from England, and which is to be found in the Report for 1821; and also to the resolution passed in the meeting of 1825, after their last Deputation had returned. In these, their grateful acknowledgments are expressed for the kindness of Christian friends in England. I am more particular in this part of my statement, than some may suppose necessary; but I was afraid, from

« AnteriorContinuar »