Assembly of 1837, all the Presbyteries were as competent to form, by their commissioners, the General Assembly of 1838, as they had ever been to form any previous Assembly.

"What, then," says our author, "will constitute the General Assembly of 1838? It must be chosen in the same manner as the last, that is, it must be chosen by all the Presbyteries, which choose to be represented. "The General Assembly shall represent in one body all the particular churches of this denomination." "It shall be denominated the General Assembly." "The General Assembly shall consist of an equal delegation of bishops and elders from each Presbytery." The delegates or commissioners are appointed by all the Presbyteries "to consult, vote and determine, on all things that may come before that body." They are all equal in power and right-all are appointed in the same manner, and bring the same evidence of it. If any have superiority, whence do they derive it? etc. It is not necessary that they should all be present, but none must be excluded who bring the proper evidence of their appointment. If some are excluded, it is not a judicatory of the whole Church-it does not "represent in one body all the particular Churches"-it is not "the bond of union, peace, corres pondence and mutual confidence among all our Churches"—it has no right to "superintend the concerns of the whole Church"-it is not the "General Assembly," etc.

Any fourteen or more of these commissioners, one half of whom shall be ministers, being met, on the day and at the place appointed, shall be a quorum for the transaction of business." Any number, "being met," are necessary to form a quorum. Fourteen are not a quorum, if there be more there. No business can be transacted unless there be a quorum. It is not the General Assembly till there is a quorum competent to transact business; and there cannot constitutionally be a quorum for the transaction of business, if any of "fourteen or more, being met," are excluded or debarred from their participation in the transaction of business. On any other construction, there might be a dozen quorums of the General Assembly competent to transact business, which is absurd. These principles are so universally received and acted on in all the transactions of public affairs, that it is believed that the whole history of deliberative bodies, no matter with what factious zeal or unprincipled party-spirit they may have been characterized, does not furnish an instance, in which it was ever before pretended, that a part of a body of directors, trustees, managers, representatives, of any sort could exclude their associates, and legally exercise the authority of the whole, except such were the express terms of their association."

These are the principles which are maintained in the Essay before us. They were brought before the public in several

newspapers, and in the pamphlet under review, a few weeks before the meeting of the General Assembly in May last. They were not new. Most of them had been urged in other essays, speeches and publications, but they were here combined and clearly stated, and supported by an array of arguments which left no longer any ground of doubt or hesitation as to their substantial correctness. They were accordingly adopted and acted on with great unanimity, by almost the entire number of the commissioners to the General Assembly of 1838, who were opposed to the exscinding acts of the Assembly of 1837.

As was expected, the clerks of the former Assembly, in obedience to the order of that Assembly, and in fulfilment of their pledge or promise to the same, made out a partial roll of the Assembly of 1838, declining to receive the commissions and to record the names of the commissioners from all the Presbyteries within the bounds of the disowned Synods. The names of the said commissioners were then tendered to the Moderator, and a motion made and duly seconded that that roll be completed by their insertion. The Moderator declared the motion out of order. The member proposing it appealed to the Assembly from this decision. The Moderator declared this also out of order, and refused to put the appeal. This was regarded as a palpable refusal of the Moderator to discharge the duties of his office, and, as, by virtue of his having been the Moderator of the last preceding Assembly, he was by constitution declared to be the Moderator of the present Assembly only "until another should be appointed in his place," a commissioner present, whose name was already enrolled, nominated another commissioner to be now appointed Moderator of this Assembly. This nomination being duly seconded, was put to vote by the individual who made the nomination, and carried in the affirmative by a large majority, very few being heard to vote in the negative; whereupon the Commissioner named was declared to be duly elected Moderator of the General Assembly for the time being. The Clerks, who had refused to receive and record the names of certain commissioners, were then superseded by the appointment of others in their place, the roll was completed by adding the names of all the commissioners present, which had been omitted, and the General Assembly was organized, as is claimed, in all respects, according to the Constitution.

In the mean time, that portion of the Commissioners present, who approved of the exscinding resolutions of the General As

sembly of 1837, refused to act with the Assembly constituted as above, and proceeded to constitute what they also claim to be the General Assembly. Their proceedings, in the matter of organization, as far as we know, with the exception of their having excluded from their seats the commissioners above referred to, were according to the constitution and usages of the church. Thus have been constituted two bodies each claiming to be The General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United States. Each of these bodies proceeded to perform according to their best discretion, all the acts and duties required to be done by the highest judicatory of the church. These acts conflicting, as they do, with each other, and in some cases involving the rights of property, as well as constitutional privileges and duties, have imposed upon the adherents of both bodies the necessity of an appeal to the civil tribunals of the country to determine which of the two is in law, and in fact, the Constitutional General Assembly. Prosecutions, we understand, have already been commenced for the settlement of the great question at issue.

We hardly need to remark, that this is a state of things deeply to be deplored, not only by Presbyterians, but by Christians generally. The collisions which have resulted in this separation, have brought great reproach upon the cause of religion; and the result itself is reproachful. It is but little relief to our own feelings to say that separation is better than for the parties to have remained in one body, to contend with each other before a gazing world, as they have done for several years past. To make the best of it, the alternative is but the substitution of one evil for another; and upon the authors of the former, of whatever party, whose acts and doings have created a necessity for the latter, there rests a tremendous responsibility.

These two divisions of the once united Presbyterian church, will hereafter constitute two denominations of Presbyterians. One of the Assemblies recently in session, will in due time, be determined to be the legal successor of the General Assembly of 1837. That one and each future Assembly which shall be formed in pursuance of the position which it has assumed, by commissioners from all the Presbyteries which choose to be thus represented, will, of right, retain the name and authority of the "General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United States." The other Assembly, with its successors, will inherit

no rights from its predecessors, but will acquire new rights by the action of such Presbyteries as shall choose to constitute such Assemblies, either under the provisions of the present "Form of Government," or any other which they shall adopt. Which of the two bodies shall be reduced to this alternative, we need not be especially solicitous. It will be the duty of the parties, as citizens, no less than as Christians, to respect the decisions of the tribunals to which they are amenable. Both parties should remember that the success of either in establishing its claim, before a civil court, to the rights and privileges of the General Assembly, under the present constitution, is but a minor interest, not worthy to be compared with the greater duties and responsibilities which devolve upon both these divisions of the church, in the positions which they have respectively taken; and worse even, than division, will be the result, if the strength of these bodies shall be frittered away and lost in contending for their claimed inheritance. While the question on this subject is pending, let not the parties delay their work as Christians, as ministers, and as members of the church universal. A name to live, though it be supported by the best evidences of orthodoxy, or sustained by the laws of the land, will not constitute success in this conflict. There can be no desirable triumph to either party, excepting that which shall be celebrated in the songs of the redeemed rescued from perdition and restored to the favor of God through its instrumentality. "And here," in the language of the late Dr. Rice of Virginia, "is the fairest opportunity for that party which has the best spirit, and the most of truth on their side, to gain the victory. For, my life on it, in this age, those who do most to build up the kingdom of the Redeemer, will prevail."

ARTICLE X.

CRITICAL NOTICES.

1.-Researches into the Physical History of Mankind. By James Cowles Prichard, M. D. F. R. S. M. R. I. A., Corresponding Member of the National Institute of France, Honorary Fellow of King's and Queen's College of Physicians in Ireland, Member of the Royal Academy of Medicine of Paris. Third Edition. London, 1836-7. Vols. I. and II. pp. 376, 373.

Dr. Prichard, the author of the volumes before us, has already made himself favorably known to the literary and scientific world. Besides the former editions of the present work, he has published a Treatise on Insanity, said to be the best work on mental derange ment in the English language; a Review of the Doctrine of a Vital Principle; and a learned Analysis of the Egyptian Mythology. The diversities of structure in the human family early engaged his attention, and in 1808 he selected this subject for the argument of a Latin inaugural essay, printed at that time. The same treatise was translated and enlarged in 1813, and under this new form it made the first edition of the present work. After further and laborious investigation he brought out a second edition in 1826, to which in 1831 he added an able philological essay on the eastern origin of the Celtic nations, proved by a comparison of their dialects with the Sanscrit, Greek, Latin, and Teutonic nations. He now presents to the public a third edition. In the words of the author" each edition has been almost entirely written anew every topic comprised in it has been reconsidered, with the advantage of such additional information as I have been in the interval enabled to acquire."

The Physical History, or Physiognomical Ethnography of the human race is a department of knowledge of the most recent dateindeed it owes its origin to an author now living, Professor Blumenbach of Göttingen. Dr. Prichard had, however, thought deeply upon the subject before the works of Blumenbach fell into his hands, and with these for a foundation it has been presented in a better form and with clearer illustration. The comparative physiology and psychology of the different human races has never before been made the express subject of inquiry.

In the first of these volumes, Dr. Prichard has impartially investigated the question with regard to the unity of the origin of the human races, which he successfully endeavors to decide by analogies

• Lectures on Physiology, Zoology, and the Natural History of Man. London, 1819.