plaints, or with supplying with ministers or candidates such parties of men, as shall separate from any presbyterian or congregational churches, that are not within their bounds, unless the matters in controversy be submitted to their jurisdiction by both parties." 1

No one at all acquainted with the history of the schism can fail to remark that these articles were intended to guard against the occurrence of a similar unhappy division. The principal ostensible causes of the rupture, were disregarding the acts of synod, the public denunciation of ministers in good standing, and the dividing of congregations. As to all these points, Mr. Gilbert Tennent and his immediate friends, had ever been in a small minority. It was their zeal for practical religion, and not their conduct in the matters just specified, which was the ground of sympathy between them and their numerous associates in the formation of a new synod. There is little doubt that Mr. Tennent assented to these articles as readily as any man; for it was only on the ground of the extraordinary circumstances of the times, that he justified his occasional disregard of the principles which they contain.

This synod founded upon the above truly presbyterian and Christian principles, and embracing so large a portion of the most fervent and able men in the church, rapidly increased in numbers and influence. In 1746, we find the following names of ministers who were not present at the preceding meeting, John Roan, John Bostwick, Thomas Arthur, John Grant, Andrew Hunter, David Brainerd, William Dean, Eleazer Wales. In 1747, the following

2

1 Minutes of the synod of New York, pp. 2-4.

2 Mr. Wales was one of the original members of the presbytery of New Brunswick. It is not to be inferred, therefore, that a minister was received into the synod, the year his name first happens to appear on the minutes.

new names occur: Jacob Green, Nathaniel Tucker, James Campbell, James Davenport, Daniel Laurence, Samuel Sackett, Timothy Sims, Alexander Hutcheson, and Samuel Davies; in 1748, Job Prudden, Thomas Lewis, and Andrew Sterling; in 1749, John Rodgers, Aaron Richards, Caleb Smith, Silas Leonard, Charles McKnight,1 and the whole presbytery of Suffolk, Long Island. That presbytery applied the preceding year to be taken into communion with synod, and requested to be permitted to attend by delegates. This the synod declined, but offered to receive them upon the same terms as they did other presbyteries. This was acceded to, and Messrs. Ebenezer Prime and James Brown took their seats as members of synod in 1749. The absent members of the presbytery of Suffolk, as then constituted, as far as can be gathered from the minutes, were Silvanus White, Samuel Buel, and Naphtali Dagget. In 1750, the new members reported were Timothy Allen, Israel Read, John Brainard, Elihu Spencer, Daniel Thane, and Enos Ayres; in 1751, John Moffat, Chauncey Graham, Samuel Kennedy, Benjamin Chesnut, Alexander Cummings, Jonathan Elmore, John Campbell, John Todd, and Hugh Henry; in 1752, Conrad Wurtz, Robert Smith, and James Finly; in 1753, Evander Morrison, Samuel Harker, Alexander Creaghead, (who, it seems, had left the Seceders and returned to the Presbyterian Church,) Joseph Park, and Robert Henry; in 1754, John Smith, Nehemiah Greenman, Henry Martin, John Maltby, Eliphalet Ball, and John Wright; in 1755, Hugh Knox, John Brown, and John Hoge; in 1756, Nathaniel Whitaker, Benjamin Hait, Benjamin Talmage, Abner Reeves, Moses Tuttle, and John Harris; in 1757, William

1 Mr. McKnight's name does not occur on the books of the synod before 1749, though he was ordained by the presbytery of New Brunswick in 1744.

Ramsay, George Duffield, and Hugh McAdams; in 1758, Abraham Kettletas. The whole number of ministers reported as in connexion with the synod in 1758, the year in which the union with the synod of Philadelphia took place, was seventy two.

In the history of this synod, the first subject to be considered is their missionary labours. In 1745, at their first meeting, the circumstances of Virginia were brought before them, and the opinion unanimously expressed that Mr. Robinson was the proper person to visit that colony. He was accordingly earnestly pressed to go and spend some months there. Mr. Robinson had already, as mentioned in a previous chapter, preached in Virginia with great acceptance and success in 1743, having been sent thither by the presbytery of New Brunswick. In 1746, a supplication for a minister was presented to the synod from Hanover, in Virginia, which was referred to the presbyteries of Newcastle and New Brunswick. Before Mr. Robinson's visit to Virginia, in 1743, besides the numerous presbyterian emigrants who had settled in what were then the western portions of the colony, there were four or five families in Hanover, who had separated from the established church, and were accustomed to celebrate public worship among themselves. For this little company Mr. Robinson preached repeatedly during a stay of four days in their neighbourhood. After his departure they made repeated applications for supplies to the presbytery of Newcastle, who sent them several ministers at different times during four years, who stayed with them two or three sabbaths at a time. During this period they were also visited by Messrs. G. and W. Tennent of the presbytery of New Brunswick. The number of dissenters in and about Hanover had, by

1 Minutes, p. 4.

this time, so much increased, that in 1747, when Mr. Davies was first sent to them by the presbytery of Newcastle, in compliance with their earnest request, he "found them sufficiently numerous to form one very large congregation or two small ones; and they had built five meetinghouses, three in Hanover, one in Henrico, and one in Louisa county." They presented a most earnest call before the presbytery for Mr. Davies to settle among them as their pastor, which he accepted in 1748. The labours of this eminent man "were very successful in every part of the country where he itinerated, much more so than he supposed; for to this day, (1799,) we find many seals of his ministry scattered up and down the country wherever he preached; and there are few congregations in this presbytery, (Hanover,) that may not acknowledge that he was in a great measure their founder." 2

In 1748, the synod sent Mr. Cumming to Augusta county, and Mr. Hunter to the lower counties in Virginia, to spend four sabbaths. 3 In 1749, Mr. Davenport was directed to visit Virginia, and in 1750, the presbytery of New Brunswick was urged to send Mr. Todd, and the presbytery of New York Messrs. Syms and Greenman to the same field of labour. The synod also renewed the appointment of Mr. Davenport. In 1751, "the distressing circumstances of Virginia," were again brought before the synod, who appointed Mr. Greenman to go there and supply the congregations for some time. The same year Mr. Davies requested, that an account relating to the dissenting interests in Virginia, should be sent to England,

1 See letter of Mr. Davies to the Bishop of London, dated, January 10, 1752, printed in the Biblical Repertory and Princeton Review, for April'

1840.

MS. History.

3 Minutes, p. 12.

and Messrs. Burr and Pemberton were appointed to prepare a representation of the circumstances of the presbyterian congregations in that colony, to be forwarded to Drs. Doddridge and Avery.1

As the Church of England was early established in Virginia, the presbyterians were there legally in the position of dissenters. The colonial assembly had passed a law adopting the English toleration act as a law of the colony. It was on this ground, and not on that of its original enactment, that Mr. Davies and other presbyterians recognised its authority and complied with its provisions. This is distinctly stated in a letter from Mr. Davies to Dr. Avery of London, dated, May 21, 1752. "I am fully satisfied," he says, "that, as you intimate, the act of uniformity and other penal laws against non-conformity, are not in force in the colonies; and consequently that the dissenters have no right, nor indeed any need to plead the act of toleration as an exemption from those penal laws. But, Sir, our legislature here has passed an act of the same kind with those laws, (though the penalty is less,) requiring all adult persons to attend on the established church. As this act was passed since the revolution, it was necessary that protestant dissenters should be exempted from its operation, and tolerated to worship God in separate assemblies, (though indeed at the time of its enaction, viz: the fourth of Queen Anne, there was not a dissenting congregation, except a few Quakers, in the colony,) and for this our legislature thought fit to take in the act of parliament made for that end in England, rather than to pass a new one peculiar to this colony. This, Sir, you may see in my remonstrance to the governor and council, which I find has been laid before you. Now it is with a view to exempt ourselves from the

1 Minutes, p. 32.