in the crown for its appropriation at pleasure. The Wesleyan Missionary Society in London had for some years been receiving £700 per annum out of the casual and territorial revenues, in aid of their missions among the native Indian tribes; but when the clergy reserves began to be available, it was proposed by the government to transfer that grant to its more appropriate place the reserve fund. Before doing this, the Governor General took the opinion of several of the more interested parties, with a view to secure their concurrence; and among the rest, his Excellency sent for Mr. Egerton Ryerson, who, as editor of the Christian Guardian, had been accustomed for many years to watch over the rights, and to communicate with the government on all civil matters relating to, the Methodists in Canada. It was a letter written by Mr. Ryerson to the governor-general in relation to this annual grant, which gave such high offence to the British conference, as could not be overlooked or forgiven. As the gist of the dispute rests on this letter, the following extract from a communication by the Messrs. Ryersons to Lord John Russell will give the reader a pretty accurate view of the whole matter.

'As the circumstances under which Mr. Ryerson wrote to his Excellency the governor-general of Canada the letter referred to have been misunderstood, it may be worth while to state them. His Excellency, having determined to undertake the settlement of the long agitated question of the clergy reserves in Upper Canada, sent, during the last week in December and the first week in January last, for ministers and influential members of various religious denominations, in order to ascertain their opinions and wishes on that subject. Amongst others he sent for Mr Ryerson, and also for the Rev. Messrs. Stinson and Richey, the former, president of the Upper Canada conference, and representative of the London Wesleyan committee in England, the latter, a member of the Wesleyan conference in England, but temporarily connected with the Wesleyan Methodist church in Upper Canada by a special vote of the Canadian conference. As the governor-general proposed to transfer all the religious grants which had been paid out of the casual and territorial revenues, as first charges upon the clergy reserve fund; and as those charges would for some years absorb the entire fund, Mr. Ryerson submitted to his Excellency the justice and reasonableness of making a grant to the conference of the Wesleyan Methodist church in Canada, in aid of the Upper Canada Academy, and of transferring that with the other religious grants to the clergy reserve fund. His Excellency objected, upon the ground that several hundred pounds per annum had already been granted in aid of the Wesleyan body in Upper Canada. Mr. Ryerson assured his Excellency that he was mistaken, and laid before his Excellency several documents to satisfy him that the grant referred to had not been made to the Wesleyan body in Canada, nor in aid of its funds. His Excellency considered the matter of sufficient importance to require a

thorough investigation, and requested Mr. Ryerson to recapitulate in writing the substance of what he had stated verbally. Mr. Ryerson did so in a letter dated January 2nd, 1840. On the same day (January 2, 1840), Messrs. Stinson and Richey had an interview with his Excellency, during which they informed his Excellency that the union between the English and Canadian conferences was expected to be dissolved (a measure the most remote from the thoughts of the members of the Canadian conference), and desired his Excellency so to frame his bill as to secure that portion of the proceeds of the reserves, to the control of which the conference of the Wesleyan Methodist church in Canada would be entitled, to the control of the Wesleyan conference in England, for the benefit of those who should adhere to it on the dissolution of the union with the Canadian conference. On the day following, Messrs. Stinson and Richey embodied their views in a memorial to his Excellency. In that memorial the Wesleyan conference in Canada is superseded by the Wesleyan conference in England, when one of the articles of union between the two bodies provided that the former should have no claim upon the funds of the latter.

There is reason to believe that in the interview above alluded to, his Excellency gave Messrs. Stinson and Richey no reason to expect countenance from him to a proposition so obviously unjust and impolitic. Their views and statements furnished his Excellency with additional reasons for examining into all the existing relations and interests of the Wesleyan bodies in Canada and in England. His Excellency examined all the despatches and other documents which related to the subject, and sought for information from official persons, and from other quarters. The result of the investigation was, a strong conviction in the mind of his Excellency that the Canada conference should alone be regarded as the head and representative of the Wesleyan Methodist church in Canada; that the grant which had been made to the London Wesleyan missionary committee, out of the Canadian casual and territorial revenue, operated injuriously rather than beneficially to the interests of the conference of the Wesleyan Methodist church in Canada, and was not distributed in a manner, and did not accomplish the objects, contemplated by the imperial government when that grant was made, and ought to be distributed in a different manner hereafter. His Excellency informed Mr. Ryerson of the result of his investigations and inquiries, and requested Mr. Ryerson to prepare a statement in writing of the financial relations between the Wesleyan conference in England and the conference of the Wesleyan Methodist church in Canada.'—pp. 24—26.

That a private individual, however deeply interested or closely connected with the subject in hand, should presume to communicate with government, even though it were on a matter concerning which the Canadian conference was formally allowed to take their own course, was an offence of no ordinary kind. Accordingly, at the conference at Newcastle in August last, three allegations or matters of complaint' were brought against Mr. Ryerson, which they considered as fully

proved, and for which no justification in the opinion of the conference was established.

1. A practical superseding of the Rev. Joseph Stinson, as President, by communicating with the governor-general separately, and without his knowledge, and by acting without him, and without the committee of the Upper Canada conference-of which committee Mr. Stinson was a member, and Chairman (ex officio)—on matters affecting the permanency of the government grant to the Wesleyan Missionary Society.

2. A violation of the obligations arising from the union, in not opposing, but rather countenancing, the payment of our grant in a certain contingency, not to us, but to the Upper Canada conference, for other and different purposes.

3. The decidedly and prominently political character of the 'Christian Guardian,' in violation of pledges given to us and to the Upper Canada conference from 1833 to 1839.'

In relation to the first and second of these charges, an explanation has already been given in the preceding extract. In reference to the last, some singular facts are brought to light in this controversy. Mr. Egerton Ryerson is the party specially impeached, as giving such a decidedly political character to their proceedings. On searching a little deeper, however, we were somewhat surprised to learn, that from 1833, when the union was formed, till 1835, not a syllable of dissatisfaction was uttered in any quarter; that from 1835 to 1838, Mr. Ryerson had no connexion with the paper, the editorship being held by a person whose sentiments were nearly in accordance with those of the English conference; that Mr. Ryerson's was again called to the office in 1838 at the express request of Mr. Stinson, the president for that year; but that even then, the only intimation on the matter was made in two letters, one addressed to Sir George Arthur, and the other to Mr. Stinson, who had recommended Mr. Ryerson to the office of editor. It appears, on referring to these two letters, that there is not a word in either of them about secular party politics; but the former refers to 'certain ecclesiastical questions of great import'ance and difficulty;' and the latter is wholly devoted to condemning the Guardian for opposing a national church esta'blishment in Upper Canada. It is only doing Mr. Ryerson justice to permit him to state his own case.

'I continued editor from June, 1834, to June, 1835, to the satisfaction of all parties, but refused to remain in the office any longer. The Rev. Ephraim Evans was then chosen, and continued until June, 1838. During his three years' editorship, he did discuss political questions, and the merits of political parties; and to such a degree at length, as to excite strong dissatisfaction amongst both our preachers

and people; whilst he was considered as leaning too strongly to the high party, to maintain, with proper vigor, the rights and interests of Methodism against high church pretensions and encroachments. But Dr. Alder and his colleagues were pleased with Mr. Evans's politics, lauded his editorship, and never hinted at the violation of any antipolitical pledge of 1834, or the existence of it..

I was solicited to accept the editorship of the Guardian again in June, 1837, but refused, and begged my friends to try Mr. Evans one year more. In the course of that year I was reduced to the alternative of treating the most earnest entreaties of the principal preachers with indifference, resisting the appointment of the conference, or accepting the editorship of the Guardian. And amongst the most earnest of those preachers, with whom my remonstrances were unavailing, was the Rev. Mr. Stinson, the Wesleyan committee 'superintendent in Upper Canada, with whom also agreed the Rev. Mr. Richey, the committee's assistant superintendent here. It was their opinion, as well as that of others, that high church domination required a more decided opponent, and Methodist rights and religious equality a more energetic advocate than Mr. Evans. This will appear evident from the following extract of a letter addressed by Mr. Stinson to a leading preacher, a few weeks before the session of the conference, at which I was elected editor. It is dated April 7, 1838. The extract is as follows:

"I am quite of your opinion, that brother Egerton (Ryerson) ought to take the Guardian next year, if he do not go home. Brother Evans has done well upon the whole; but there is a crisis approaching in our affairs, which will require a more vigorous hand to wield the defensive weapon of our conference. There can be no two opinions as to whom to give that weapon. We now stand on fair grounds to maintain our own against the encroachments of the oligarchy, and we must do it, or sink into a comparatively uninfluential body. This must not be.'

It will therefore be seen, that my appointment as editor was not only promoted by the representative of the Wesleyan committee, but with the express view of resisting the encroachments of the oligarchy-that is, the high church party. Messrs. Stinson and Richey had not, at that time, received instructions from Dr. Alder to support the pretensions of the high church party in Canada.'

This wants a little explanation. A few months after Mr. Ryerson was recalled to the editorship of the Guardian, an important change took place in the political aspect of affairs.

It was found that Sir George Arthur, late lieutenant-governor of this province, had thrown himself into the hands of the oligarchy' on the question of the clergy reserves-would not consent to have them applied to any other purpose than the support of the clergy, and was anxious to get them re-invested in the crown. When Sir George Arthur's views and plans were brought before the provincial legislature, I opposed them. The Wesleyan committee in London interposed to support Sir George Arthur on that question; sent a letter to Sir George, disclaiming all participation in the views of the Canada con

ference advocated by me-and sent a letter also to Mr. Stinson, instructing him to oppose me and support a church establishment in this province. Messrs. Stinson and Richey immediately turned round, and from that day forward supported the oligarchy' which they had elected me to oppose.'

This is the key to the whole business. While the successive governor-generals of Canada were of liberal sentiments, and inclined to accede to the general wishes respecting the clergy reserves, the British conference and its agents remained silent and inactive; but the moment a Tory governor starts upon the stage, and proposes a disposal of the reserves in accordance with high church claims, they instantly step in with their authority, second the arrangement, pledge their influence for his support, and employ every effort to stifle the expression of Canadian feeling in any and every form. And this, be it borne in mind, is upon a point which was left, at the commencement of the union, an open question, upon which the Canadians were to take their own course, and to work out their own views: and moreover, this is the conduct pursued by the very individuals who, in the same articles of union, pledge themselves not to interfere with the rights and privileges of the Canada con'ference.'

What, it may well be asked, have the English missionary committee, or its agents, to do in this matter? What right have they to interfere with the peculiar institutions of any country into which they introduce the gospel? Are they the apostles of Christ, or the apostles of Toryism? Is it their duty to reform the state, or to preach the gospel? We know it is usual with the preachers in England and their adherents to silence all appeals, by saying, 'Oh! the Canadians are gone astray by 'political disaffection-their piety is lost in a democratic party spirit: but there is not the shadow of proof for the assertion. Barring the church question, which is a religious and not a civil matter, there is no proof of political degeneracy, either in the spirit they display or the efforts they sustain. Their views regarding the best and wisest institutions for their country may be different from those established in Great Britain, but is that any reason why fifteen out of the twenty agents which the English Wesleyan committee employ should be sent, not to the ignorant who need the gospel, but into the heart of the circuits belonging to the Canada conference, dividing neighborhoods, societies, and families, and producing the manifold evils of schism, strife, and division?

But we will no longer detain our readers with watching the straws which this storm has raised; nor shall we attempt to adjust the various misconceptions which a long discussion like this almost of necessity creates. Nothing is easier than to as