glect, these important papers should be kept shut up so long, and that so few members of the church should have access to them, when they contain so much matter of momentous consequence, cal culated to correct many of the prevalent mistakes respecting the rise and progress and true character of the church; and which, by an unfortunate fire or other accident, might involve our history in impenetrable darkness forever.

About eight years ago, the Presbytery of Winchester, of which I was then a member, appointed me and perhaps another member (for I was not then present and have never seen the minute) to collect materials and prepare a history of that Presbytery. The performance of this duty, I was told, was expected chiefly if not wholly from myself, as being the oldest member of that body, having been a member of it from its organization. In considering the matter, I concluded it would be necessary, as an introduction to the history of that Presbytery, to go back so far as to give a succinct account of the history of the Presbyterian Church in Virginia, and thus to show from what source that Presbytery derived its organization. This led me to inquire from whence the first Presbytery in Virginia sprung, and when and how Presbyterianism was introduced into that State. I did not expect to find Presbyterians within those limits prior to that extraordinary excitement which took place in Hanover county about the time Mr. Robinson visited those parts, and which led to the settlement in Virginia of that highly fa-` vored servant of God, the Rev. Samuel Davies, of whom I had heard so much from many who professed religion under his ministry, and with whom I had been so well acquainted in my youth but, to my astonishment, I found that the first Presbyterian Minister who ever visited these Colonies was settled in Virginia, and that this State was in fact the cradle of American Presbyterianism. This was quite a new and a very interesting discovery to me. I was surprised at my former ignorance, and could meet with no brother who possessed more knowledge of the subject than myself. With a view to be still better informed, I immediately began to search for information and documents from every quarter where I thought they could be obtained. I became almost enthusiastic upon the subject; and in order to prepare the history of the little and comparatively young Presbytery of Winchester, I was led to an ac

b

quaintance with the rise and progress of the Presbyterian Church from its commencement in these United States. I then determined to write the history of that church in Virginia from its commencement; but, finding that this could not be done without giving the history of its introduction into America, and wishing others to share in the interesting discoveries I had made, I set myself to work to gather materials for this laborious yet pleasant undertaking. Thus matters stood till the meeting of the Synod of Virginia at Petersburg in October, 1836. At that meeting a beloved brother mentioned, without my knowledge that he intended to do so, that I was engaged in such a work, and had made some progress in it. That beloved Synod was pleased to express great pleasure at this information-for as yet I had mentioned it to but few-and passed a resolution expressing their desire that I should prosecute the work to a conclusion with all possible despatch; and also appointed a prominent member from each Presbytery to gather what materials they could within their respective bounds, and send them to me, and to afford me all the assistance in their power. It was grateful to me to receive such an expression of confidence from brethren I so much loved and respected, although their request that I should finish as speedily as possible a work attended with so much labor imposed a heavy duty on me, without rendering me any certain assistance, for I received not the slightest aid from the respectable committee which they appointed, either verbally or in writing, except a few statistics from the stated clerk of Winchester Presbytery, where I least needed help of the kind. During the month of May, 1837, I visited Philadelphia, and with some difficulty obtained permission to examine the original minutes of the Mother Presbytery, and other documents and papers giving information respecting the early history of the church. My permission to use these papers, and take notes and extracts, was limited to about a week, at the expiration of which time I was obliged to return them. With these materials, and what I had before collected, I went to work, and prepared as much of the early history of the church in manuscript as I supposed would make one common-size octavo volume. During the autumn of the year 1837, I wrote to Dr. Miller, expressing a desire, if he could command as much time, that he would revise my manuscript before it was put to press, and favor me with his

friendly remarks on, and objections to, any thing he might meet with that he disapproved of. I stated, as the reason why this application was made to him, that I supposed he had studied the history of our church with more care than any one I knew of, and had access to the best sources of information, and that I wished the work to be as free from faults as possible before it issued from the press. He returned a very friendly and polite answer, saying that he had not as much time at command as such an undertaking would require; and, if he had, his eyes were in such a weak state as would render it highly improper for him to attempt it. But he said candor required him to tell me that he differed entirely with me in relation to some statements of facts he had seen in some of my letters lately published in the Richmond Religious Telegraph, but he did not state what those facts were. I immediately wrote back, and told him I thought it was due to candor and the friendship that had so long subsisted between us, to tell me what the points were upon which we differed, and the grounds or reasons why he differed from me. He promptly replied, and stated that we would be at issue regarding my supposition that there were some of the congregations belonging to the Mother Presbytery who were suffered to manage their affairs without ruling Elders, and that the Presbytery at first omitted adopting any confession of faith or form of government; that my statements had lately been opposed in the Presbyterian, and, as he supposed, by Dr. Green; and that, if he had seen Dr. Green's numbers in the eleventh volume of the Christian Advocate before he published his letters addressed to the members of the Presbyterian Church, his statements in several respects would have been different from what they were. I had been nearly eight years preparing materials and forming my opinions, and had taken my ground before any high excitement or division had occurred in our church, and a great part of my manuscript had been prepared before the exciting and divisive scenes that happened at the Assembly of 1837. I had not seen the strictures upon my opinions then, which had been made in the Presbyterian. I sought that paper without delay, and was much surprised that my statements were so flatly contradicted. I had overlooked the numbers in the Christian Advocate, although I took that publication. I had not then read the numbers in the eleventh volume, and the statement in the Pres

byterian was but a repetition of what I found had been in the Christian Advocate. Finding Dr. Green and myself so pointedly at issue, I went immediately to Philadelphia, waited upon the Doctor, and told him I had discovered we differed upon some points relating to our church history; and that, as I was preparing a history for the press, I wished another opportunity to examine the records and papers in his possession, to see if I had been mistaken, as I wished to publish nothing that could not be substantiated. He said he was glad to hear me say so, and, with more cheerfulness than before, gave me the use of them, without restricting me as to time, as he did before. I kept them about ten or twelve days, perused them very carefully, and procured the assistance of an amanuensis to aid me in making extracts. This second examination of the records, with other documents which then fell in my way, confirmed me more than ever in the correctness of my first opinions and state

ments.

Wishing, however, before I put my work to press, to hear every thing that could be said against the grounds I meant to take, I came home and published in the Southern Religious Telegraph a few hasty Sketches, to elicit what might be said in opposition to what I thought was the truth in the case. The publication of these hasty and superficial papers excited more attention and awakened more interest than I anticipated. The anxiety with which they were sought after, plainly showed that they communicated information and made disclosures that were much needed, and by them many of our best informed Ministers were brought to see how little they knew before of the rise and progress of our beloved church, which induced them ardently to desire still further information upon that subject; and hence, desires and importunities from various and distant quarters have been sent to me ever since to prosecute this work still further. But while my Sketches afforded pleasure to many, they awakened apprehensions and enkindled opposition, in these times of party collision, to a degree which was little expected. My opinions upon American Presbyterianism having been formed before party strife had done such mischief among us, my statements were made entirely irrespective of these evil times on which we have fallen. The application I made to my venerable and much respected friend Dr. Miller, and the sentiments therein

expressed of my intention to conclude my history without entering into the present controversies, afford evidence of this. Although I knew we had begun to differ upon some of the points of late litigation, I wished and expected him to assist me in preparing a history of our church, without anticipating at the time that there would be any material difference in our views. But, to my grief, I found that in this I was disappointed, and that some of the opinions I had expressed had alarmed the zealous partisans in existing controversies. I saw clearly what I did not apprehend before, that it was to be made a party business, and that what I had stated as historical facts were thought to impinge heavily against one side of the controversy.

But my poor meager Sketches had the effect of producing the main result I wished, which was that, if opposition was to be made to my sentiments, I might see it in all its force in time to profit by it, before I went more at large before the community. If arguments were to be brought forward which could not be answered, I felt perfectly willing to yield to conviction. If only such arguments were used as were calculated to mislead and conceal the truth, I was willing to do what I could to defend the truth. Dr. Hodge's late work no doubt contains the substance of all that can be said in opposition to the positions I have taken; and, from what he says in his preface, it seems that this work was assigned him by a grave consultation of the strongest men who belonged to an opposing party. It is then to be looked upon as the joint production of the strength of a party, aided by men venerated for age, experience, and talents, and having access to the best sources of information and means of defence. Nothing but a full conviction of the truth of my cause could induce me, with my slender abilities and scanty means, to contend with such fearful odds against me. But truth is mighty, and must prevail. If her sacred cause should ever need my help, I trust that it shall not be withheld, whether it expose me to evil or good report. The only regret I feel upon this occasion is, that I have not talents for her defence more adequate to the importance of the occasion. The situation in which I am now placed, and the duty I now undertake to perform, are among the most painful incidents which have occurred during my wearisome pilgrimage. At my advanced time of