Wednesday, 11 April 2018

Waitin' on the Sea


The Irish Mariner's Soliloquy

With the soul o' me in Erin, an' meself upon the sea
    Where the soundin' o' the battle I can hear,
Shure me thoughts are all in Erin, where I'm thinkin' long to be,
An the Autumn whispers tremble o'er the shinin' wave to me.
    For the time is in the fadin' o' the year.

Over there the lads are fightin' where the ceaseless bullets fall,
    But the waitin' on the waters falls to me,
An' they say the waitin's needed, but it tries you most of all,
An' you wouldn't be awonderin' why I hear me Erin call
    If you've listened to the callin' o' the sea.

Once you've seen the look o' Erin when the mists are on the corn
    You'll be mindin' it no matter where you roam,
Shure it's now I'm seein' visions o' the golden harvest morn,
An' across the rollin' waters there's a tender music borne
    That recalls to me the song o' “Harvest Home.”

Oh, they're singin' it in Erin, but they're sighin' as they sing
    For the sorrow o' the reapin' at the War,
They are wonderin' what the comin' o' the victory will bring,
For it's Erin's sons have mingled in the flghtin' for the King,
    Aye, they've answered her from other lands afar.

Shure before I did the waitin', it was me that used to go
    Where the sons o' Erin trod an alien strand,
An' I brought them back to Erin o'er the ocean's fretful flow,
There were some she'd near forgotten they had gone so long ago!
    But they hadn't lost the likin' for their land.

An' they couldn't help the yearnin' that the call o' Erin gave,
    For it whispered o' a memory pure an' blest,
An' 'twas me that took them onward to the lands that need the brave,
An' they've shared the pride o' Erin, some have shared a hero-grave
    For the glory o' the homeland in the West.

Have you ever gone athinkin' when the breakin' wave you see
    How on every shore it's just the same to view?
Other charms o' Nature differ when in distant lands you be,
But you'll always be familiar with the image o' the sea,
    An' you'll hear it singin' things you always knew.

It's the likes o' me that knows it, an' I'm thinkin' as I stay
    Where the rollin' ocean wave around me parts,
How the sea was also breakin' o'er the shore so far away,
Where I sailed the sons o' Erin to their honour's battle-day,
    Shure it seemed a link o' Erin to their hearts!

You'd have heard a welcome soundin' in its music's boundless strain,
    It had sung farewell by Erin's peaceful shore,
But the same unbroken spirit rang from out each proud refrain—
It was Glory out in Erin, it was Glory o'er the main
    Where another land it's trace o' battle bore.

I'd be likin' them to hear it when in battle now they stand,
    For they'd feel the guardian love o' Erin near.
Or if ever they were passin' to the silent Shadow-land
It would sing o' higher Glory, till they'd sleep, an' understand
    Why they died to do the winnin' o' it here.

Shure I'm wishin' I was needed where the battleships have gone,
    For you'd feel that you were doin' somethin' great,
An' you wouldn't be afearin' when the foe comes sailin' on,
But there's other kind o' danger that you mightn't think upon,
    An' it's this that makes them say you need to wait.

So I'm proud to do the waitin', though me thoughts are often twined
    With the land that sets me deepest longin' free,
But you're always like to thinkin' on the things you leave behind,
An' it's just the sorb o' Erin to be comin' to your mind
    When you have to do the waitin' on the sea.

LILY MARCUS.
Londonderry

The Witness, 15th September 1916.




Wednesday, 4 April 2018

The Presbyterian Church Instrumental Music Controversy pt15

By “THE MAN IN THE STREET.”

We interrupted our narrative of the movement towards peace and unity on the instrumental music question for the purpose of recalling the great event of the jubilee of the march towards unity in the Irish Presbyterian Church. As the union of the Synod of Ulster and the Secession Synod constituting the General Assembly was a red letter day in the history of the church in the first half of the last century, the jubilee was a red letter day in the second half. As the outcome of the movement towards union was the occasion of conflict and prayer ending in harmony, so was the movement toward peace and unity on the instrumental music question. And in one case as in the other, the result made for peace and well-being of the Church and the success of its great work of harmony, peace, and progress.

As the truce on the question that had lasted for three years came to an end in 1891, the question came up for reconsideration. The committee, of which the Rev. Dr. Heron was convener, brought up a report of their final effort to effect the object of their appointment. Dr. H. B. Wilson and Dr. D. A. Taylor, who had visited several of the Southern congregations, reported that in Clonmel, Waterford, Parsonstown, and Carlow the ministers and congregations regarded the instrument as a necessity, and could not give it up; Wexford would give up the instrument if all other congregations did the same; Mountmellick had tried to do with a precentor, and had failed; but if the Assembly would get them a precenter they would consider the question of trying it again. The two deputies added this sentence to their report — “It is due to the ministers and congregations referred to in this report to acknowledge that while in every case we failed to obtain an absolute promise that the harmonium would be discontinued, we became assured that the action of the congregations we visited resulted from their deep conviction that to give up the use of their musical instrument would be practically to silence the voice of the congregational praise in them and to peril their existence.” No deputation was sent to Queenstown, as Mr. Simpson “would not co-operate.” The session and committee of Newtonbreda submitted to the Assembly’s committee “that with their convictions and experience, it would be inexpedient to disturb existing arrangements in regard to the praise service at a time when they are engaged in the serious work of building the church.” A decision similar in substance was come to by the congregations of Enniskillen and Longford. Since the appointment of the committee it was stated that instrumental aid had been dispensed with in Magheramorne, Kilkenny, and Tullamore.

In 1891 the Rev. Wm. Park was succeeded in the chair by the Rev. Dr. N. M.. Brown, Limavady, who was one of the leading supporters of the anti-instrumental party, and one who as minister and citizen had taken a great part in the political life of the province, especially in connection with the land question and the Home Rule question. On the latter, it may not be without interest to quote one or two sentences from his opening address as indicative of the feeling and the interest on it. “Our Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen are a genial, generous, and warm-hearted race, whose battles we have fought along with our own, and whose burdens and disabilities we helped to remove that we might have justice, equality, and fair play all round. But we have not the slightest notion of following the political vagaries of reckless, selfish, and designing men who have duped too many of the credulous and unwary by such cries as ‘Ireland for the Irish,’ ‘Ireland a Nation,’ and ‘Home Rule,’ all of which, translated into simple English, undoubtedly means a new tyranny in Ireland and the dismemberment of the British Empire. We are privileged and honoured citizens at present of an Empire on which the sun never sets; and we are not going to barter away such a birthright for a mess of pottage however cunningly cooked or deftly served.

The Rev. Dr. Johnston, who had been a great worker for harmony in the whole movement, brought up the report, and tabled the resolutions of the committee. These recorded thankfulness to God for the peace arrived at by the arrangement of ’86, expressed satisfaction that each party to the truce had kept faith, and no new instruments had been introduced; and having regard to the happy, arrangements, resolved to continue the arrangement for another five year, “in the hope that by the end of that time a way may be found out of the difficulty without injury to the peace or welfare of the Church;” meantime urging the brethren to consider the circumstances of the Church and the country, to avoid divisive courses, and to cultivate a spirit of mutual forbearance. Of the committee appointed to watch over the matter, only the following are alive — Dr. Heron, Dr. Wylie, Dr. D. A. Taylor, Dr. John MacDermott, Dr. Wm. Park, Dr. Samuel Prenter, and Professor Dr. Hamill.

Dr. Johnston, in his brief conciliatory speech, made reference to the thundercloud represented by Dr. Petticrew’s notice of motion to rescind the resolutions of ’83 and ’84. Rev. Archibald Robinson, who at this time had become professor of the Assembly’s College and D.D., took, exception to the tone of some of Dr. Wilson’s remarks; but, taking tip the parable of the thunderbolt, be said — “There was now no thundercloud at all. He did not like a thundercloud. He was afraid when any great man or small told him that he had plucked the bolt out of it. He would rather that person stood under it than he (the speaker). He wanted no thundercloud, without bolt or with one. He wanted a sunny firmament such as they had had during the last five years. During these five years they had enjoyed a prosperity which had not been known for a generation. He wanted five years more at anyrate in which the Church would be able to put forth all her energies to the great work of the Lord instead of fighting with one another in that Assembly on a question which should never have been in it.”

At the close of Professor Robinson’s speech, the Moderator was about to put the resolution, when the Rev. Dr. A. C. Murphy ascended the platform amid cries of “Pass, pass,” and, taking off his coat, seemed resolved to be heard and to move an amendment. Professor Robinson thought Dr. Murphy should be heard; but the Rev. Wm. Simpson, Queenstown, who said that he was called a firebrand and a stormy petrel, to content himself, as he would by entering his dissent. Ultimately Dr. Murphy delivered a speech, in which he said he could not agree to the resolution, as he believed the Assembly should give the congregations liberty, and he tabled his dissent. Ultimately, the closure was carried unanimously, the Moderator put the motion, and only about a dozen hands were held up against it. The Moderator, in declaring the resolution carried, said nothing in the Assembly had cheered his heart more than that finding. He congratulated the Assembly and the entire Church upon the pacific finding they had arrived at — a resolution that would go forth as a note of rejoicing over the length and breadth of the Church. A couple of verses of the 91st Psalm were then sung, and the Rev. Dr. Johnston led in prayer, and the old committee on instrumental music was discharged.


From The Witness, 5th April 1918.

Wednesday, 28 March 2018

In War


Now is Thine Earth one Calvary,
  Oh! Lord of Life, with Crosses set;
And in a sky of blood and tears
  The noonday sun hath set.

And every path is paved with thorns,
  And every Temple curtain rent;
And all the songs of love are lost
  In Grief’s lone sorrowful lament.

Amongst all other Crosses, still
  Is crowned the Cross of Christ, Thy Son;
That so Thy Fatherhood bows down
  And sorrows with each sorrowing one.

GRACE GIBSON.



Poem: The Witness, 8th March 1918


Wednesday, 21 March 2018

The Presbyterian Church Instrumental Music Controversy pt 14

By “THE MAN IN THE STREET.”

We left the Assembly of 1886, so far as this question was concerned, in a spirit of truce, and for three years there was peace in the Presbyterian Israel. Though the truce was for five years, there was a provision that the question might be again raised after three years. In the three years the committee appointed under the truce carried on their work of inquiring, reasoning, and influencing with more or less success. In 1887 it was announced that the congregation of Magheramorne, of which the Rev. D. G. M'Crea was minister, had arranged to abandon the instrument; and that while in some other cases the feeling was hopeful, there were others in which the hope was slight, if entertained at all. In the report of ’88 the spirit of hopefulness still prevailed; but no submissions were announced. In that of ’89 the congregations of Wicklow, Kilkenny, and Tullamore were added to Magheramorne as having submitted to the request of the committee, and abandoned their instruments. In summing up the work, the committee said, “During the past three years the committee have adopted the measures which, in their judgment, seemed likely to be most effective for the end in view. In several instances their efforts have prevailed. They regret that a number of congregations, for the reasons indicated [set out in full in the report] have not seen their way to yield. They are bound to add that by the brethren and the congregations generally the written communications and their deputations, where they have gone, have been treated with the greatest courtesy.”

Might I be allowed to interrupt the narrative of a movement toward union in the Church on a long vexing question, to call attention to a feature of real and actual union as represented in the Assembly of the year 1890. This was the Jubilee of the formation of the General Assembly. It was an Assembly looked forward to with great interest by the Presbyterians, and its character realised all the brightest hopes entertained respecting it. As it was on the 10th July, 1840, that the happy union of the Synod of Ulster and Secession Synod was completed, it was arranged that the meeting of Assembly should be held this year in that month. And a memorable month and a memorable meeting it was — interesting as a historic celebration, gratifying as a demonstration of Presbyterian progress, unity, and strength in Ulster, and stimulating as to the life and work of the future. An unusually large gathering of Presbyterians from all corners of the land came up to Belfast to witness and take part in the memorable proceedings, and many distinguished representatives of sister Churches and others manifested their interest in the jubilee and its associations. Rosemary Street Church was selected for the meeting, and as one of the few churches in existence at the union, and from its age, character, and associations, was specially appropriate. And to complete the ensemble the Rev. William Park, not then as now D.D., but then as now a leading ornament of the Church as preacher and pastor, and loyal Presbyterian, was elected Moderator. An additional element of appropriateness was the fact that the same year was the Jubilee of the Foreign Mission of the Church, which may be regarded as one of the first-fruits of the union, and he was at the time convener of this mission, and its most enthusiastic and able exponent and upholder. In his address after election Mr. Park, as might be expected, struck a fine keynote for the Jubilee Assembly and the loyalty of Presbyterians to Church and country, and incidentally alluded to the fact that Rosemary Street had a church history of two hundred and fifty years behind it.

I have witnessed many interesting proceedings in connection with the General Assembly and Rosemary Street, but never one more interesting than this. It was in Rosemary Street the historic Lay Conference was held in 1869 in connection with the change the Irish Church Act had brought about, and the proposal to raise £30,000 annually to enable each minister to receive £100 a year in lieu of the Regium Donum of £69,000. That was an interesting and important Conference, the greatest of its kind and time. But it had to do with the future, while this one was concerned with the past, and a glorious past. It was not only a jubilee celebration, but it marked an epoch in the history of the Church, and I refer to it now because I think that too many Presbyterians are inclined to forget the glories of the past in the troubles and struggles of the present. I well remember the sight of the celebration on that memorable Thursday, the magnificent spectacle that the church presented with the sight of so many of the older men who had lived through much of the period recalled, and of young men who were just entering upon their Presbyterian heritage. It was glorious to witness, and it is to me gratifying to recall, for it represented so much of the old vitality that had characterised the earlier history of our Presbyterianism and the a new vitality which has sustained it since, and will, I hope, continue to sustain it in the time to come. All those who were old have passed away, and of those who were young many have disappeared; but enough still remain to whom I hope it will be interesting to recall the memories of those days and the spirit, unity, and vitality they represented.

After the singing of the 146th Psalm, the Rev. Professor J. G. Murphy, of the Assembly’s College, a pre-union minister connected with the Synod of Ulster, read a portion of Scripture. A number of papers which had been specially prepared for the occasion were then read. These addresses were all published in full in a supplement to “The Witness,” which had a great sale, and copies of which were long cherished as special possessions. I came across one some time ago that had been preserved in the family of a good Presbyterian of the day. The following is a list of the authors of the papers and their subjects — Rev. Dr. H. B. Wilson, Cookstown, “Before the Union;” the Rev. President W. D. Killen, Assembly’s College, “The Story of the Union;” The Rev. Dr. William Magill, Cork, “The Baptism of the Holy Spirit;” the Rev. Thomas Lyle (convener of the Committee on Statistics), “Half a Century of Finance;” Rev. Dr. Lynd, “The Place and Work of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland;” the Rev. the Moderator (Rev. Wm. Park), “Progress of our Mission Work During the Last Half Century;” the Rev. Dr. John Hall, New York, on “Irish Presbyterians in Other Lands;” the Rev. T. S. Woods, “The Fathers and Brethren of the Union Still Spared Among Us.”

During the reading of Mr. Woods’ paper, a historic picture which he had been specially requested to prepare for the occasion by the Irish Jubilee Celebration Committee, was unveiled. The Rev. Frederick Buick, Ahoghill, pre-union minister of the Secession Synod, engaged in prayer. About a dozen pre-union ministers attended the celebration. The sederunt and the celebration, so far as the Church was concerned, was concluded with praise and prayer led by the Rev. J. K. Leslie, of Cookstown, a pro-union minister.

But that did not end there. In the evening a public reception was given to the Assembly, the delegates and friends, in the Botanic Gardens, where a special tent was provided, and to which eighteen hundred invitations were issued. It also was a unique and interesting meeting, and was addressed by several of the delegates. I referred above to the fact that sister Churches were represented on the occasion, and their delegates delivered addresses either in Rosemary Street or at the evening celebration, and some at both. These included the Church of Scotland, Rev. James Frazer and Rev. Thomas Martin; the English Presbyterian Church, the Rev. John Thompson (Carlisle) and the Rev. Dr. William M’Caw, himself a native of the North of Ireland; the Pan-Presbyterian Council, Rev. Dr. Marshall Lang; the Presbyterian Church of North America, the Rev. Dr. John Hall, New York, and the Rev. Dr. John Hemphill, then of Philadelphia, both Irishmen whom I well knew in their Irish days — the first as minister of Rutland Square, and the second as one of the earliest of the students of Magee College; the Southern Presbyterian Church of America, represented by the Rev. W. Campbell; the Presbyterian Church of Victoria, represented by Rev. W. M'Donald; the Rev. Dr. Blackie, father of the Pan-Presbyterian Council; Professor Comba (Florence), Sir George Brice, and others.

I think in these days, with so many other questions and interests to distract our attention, it is not out of place to recall this interesting episode in our Presbyterian history, and to keep before our minds something of the history, position, and responsibilities of our Presbyterian Church — “Lest we forget; lest we forget.”


From The Witness, 22nd March 1918.

Wednesday, 7 March 2018

The Presbyterian Church Instrumental Music Controversy pt 13

By “THE MAN IN THE STREET.”

The year 1885 was a memorable year not only in the history of the country, but in the history of the Church so far as the instrumental music question is concerned. Mr. Gladstone, by his surrender to the Nationalists and the introduction of his Home Rule Bill, had sowed the seeds of a movement for the disintegration of this country as well as of the United Kingdom, whose bitter harvest we are still reaping after forty years. The country and the Church were perturbed as they had not been for generations. A new element of division and cleavage, of which we had enough in the country, was introduced, and the great issue involved swallowed up all other issues save those affecting the spiritual life, of the Church, which was maintained in the old form, and spirit. The very night on which the Assembly met in 1886 was the night on which the division on the second reading of the first Home Rule Bill was taken, and while the Assembly was holding its opening session the Parliament was holding its closing Home Rule session. I hope many in the Assembly who, like myself, were, I fear, thinking more of the State than the Church during the meeting, have already been forgiven. At any rate, for myself as I waited for the fateful result of the division, I am afraid my thoughts wandered from the Church, and when the news came that the first Home Rule Bill had been defeated by thirty votes I am afraid that even the instrumental music controversy fell into a subordinate place.

But not only was the general aspect of this question both in the Church and country great, but locally its effect was felt. On the eve of the meeting of the Assembly riots broke out in Belfast, and did not conclude for some months, leaving behind them memories of sacrifice of order and life and character, which were not soon forgotten. It will be obvious that the Assembly meeting at such a time was impressed with the momentous gravity of the stale of the country, and with a desire for avoiding, as far as possible, any controversy in the Church. And one happy incident prepared the members hopefully in this direction. “The Witness” of Tuesday morning, the special issue on the morrow of the opening meeting, contained a telegram from Cork announcing that the congregation of Queen Street, Cork, at the earnest solicitation of their pastor, the Rev. Matthew Kerr, one of the most interesting and earnest ministers of the Church, had unanimously consented to discontinue the use of instrumental music an public worship. “The members for the most part” — the telegram added — “felt strongly that in doing this they were making a great sacrifice, which may seriously interfere with the interests of the congregation; but in view of the interests of the Church at large they were willing to sacrifice their own interests, holding, however, that whilst doing so, they had an undoubted Scriptural right to use instrumental music in public worship.” The outgoing Moderator that year was the Rev. J. W, Whigham (afterwards D.D.), of Ballinasloe, one of the ablest and staunchest of the upholders of the standard of the Church in the West, a man who was beloved and honoured in his own part of the country as over the whole Church. The new Moderator was the Rev. Dr. Robert Ross, of Derry, a minister of the highest culture and character, at once eloquent and earnest, and who, while a staunch and consistent supporter of instrumental music by voice and pen, was a man of the gentlest disposition and of the kindliest Christian spirit.

It was with no surprise that while the order of business, with its provision for the consideration of the burning question for Friday, the Rev. Dr. C. L. Morrell got up, and in his suave and happy way suggested that with the necessity of unity so clamantly demanded in the interests of the country, there should be even no appearance of division in the Church; and with that view he suggested the postponement of the entire subject, to which the Rev. Dr. Petticrew said he would consent if Dr. Morrell’s friends would agree to abandon the use of instruments in the meantime. Dr. Morrell did not think that would be fair, whereupon the Rev. Dr. T. Y. Killen moved the appointment of a committee representing both sides to see if an amicable conclusion could be arrived at. This proposal was ultimately agreed to, and such was the spirit of the time that on the evening of Thursday, the day before that fixed for receiving the report, the Moderator was able to make the gratifying announcement that a unanimous finding had been arrived at. So that we had the assurance in advance that, for the first time for years, there would be no “fighting Friday," but a pacific Friday in the Assembly.

On the Friday Dr. Killen brought forward the unanimous decision of the committee, which, in substance, was that for five years the instrumental music question should not be reopened; that a committee (composed of leading instrumentalists) should be appointed to use their utmost endeavour to induce ministers and congregations using instruments to discontinue their use; that in the event of failure those opposed to the use of instruments would not reopen the question for at least three years, the resolution of inaction for five years would cease to be binding, they in the meantime using their efforts to dissolve associations against instrumental music; and expressing satisfaction with those ministers and congregations that had given up the instruments, and hoping that other brethren would follow their example.

The Rev. Dr. Morrell moved the adoption ot these resolutions, and congratulated the Assembly on their unanimous acceptance by the committee. He hoped he was bidding farewell, and farewell for ever, to an “old friend of seventeen years’ standing.” Referring to the pledge of the Purity party about using their best exertions to bring about the dissolution of their association, he said “the best endeavours of Dr. Petticrew, Mr. Robinson, and Dr. Corkey meant that they would accomplish their object. They were really omnipotent. ‘When the great Ajax lifts his spear the trembling hosts obey.’” This good-humoured sally, which was in harmony with the feeling and spirit of the leaders on both sides was only a pleasant retort to the statement of Rev. Archibald Robinson in the earlier part of the discussion, that “if Dr. Wilson, Dr. Killen, and Dr. Morrell would only bring to bear that electricity of theirs on the minds and consciences of the brethren using instruments they might have the whole matter disposed of in a year or so.”

Mr. Robinson seconded the resolution, remarking inter alia that he was sick, sore, and tired of the whole controversy, and that if it had been a friend to Dr. Morrell for seventeen years it had been, no friend to him. The Rev. Wm. Simpson and the Rev. R. Workman asked leave to dissent. Mr. Workman said he could not conscientiously be a party to the carrying of the report unanimously, and he hoped it would be understood that it would only be moral influence that would be brought to bear. Rev. A. Robinson said that from what he knew of the moral character of the committee he was sure they would not do anything immoral. Still good humour and native humour as well, as the reader will see.

The resolutions were carried with three dissentients. — Revs. Messrs. Workman, Simpson, and J. G. Kirkpatrick (Dunluce). In declaring the resolutions passed, the Moderator said he did So with a feeling of heartfelt gratitude such as never existed in his heart before. At the request of the Moderator, the Rev. Dr. Wilson, Limerick, led the Assembly in prayer. There were a large number of memorials on the subject; but they were all held in retentis. Thus happily and hopefully the Assembly passed from the instrumental music question in 1866.


From The Witness, 8th March 1918.

Wednesday, 28 February 2018

My Home Beyond the Sea


Beyond the dark and rolling tide,
     Beyond the deep blue sea,
There is a lowly mountain cot,
     Earth’s dearest place to me.

My youthful vision first beheld
     In it the light of day.
And, Oh, it is the loveliest spot
     To me on life’s rough way.

In dreams I see its snow-white walls,
     Bedecked with roses rare;
The honeysuckle and the vine
     Entwine their branches there.

The earliest beams, of God’s great sun
     Light up each nook and dell;
And chase the dewdrops from each flower
     And path I love so well.

The sparrow and the swallow flit
     Around those whitewashed walls;
But dearer is that spot to me
     Than all earth’s lordly halls.

I love to think when sets the sun,
     Of that dear home afar;
Upon whose roof at close of day
     Beams down my polar star.

And though my eyes may never see
     That humble cot again.
The vision of its loveliness
     With me will still remain.

C. I. HOBSON.
New York City.


Poem from The Witness, 1st March 1918.
Image: Granny's Irish Cottage, an oil painting by Norma Wilson.

Wednesday, 21 February 2018

The Presbyterian Church Instrumental Music Controversy pt 12

By “THE MAN IN THE STREET.”

We took leave last week of the Assembly of 1885 in the midst of one of the most grave end critical developments of its life within, at least, my memory. The word secession has ominous significance in Church or State, and while at the time few of us imagined that there would be secession — we regarded the friends who had temporarily retired, either from pique or principle, too good and loyal Presbyterians for that — still, the situation was critical, and many great secessions have sprung from similar outbursts of feelings or determination. I well remember the excitement that was created when the Rev. Mr. Jeffrey entered the excited Assembly, and himself in rather an excited state, and announced that the withdrawn brethren were holding a meeting in the schoolroom below the church. It was evident before the withdrawal that there was a strong spirit of determination on the part of a large section of the Assembly, perhaps assisted by those in the gallery, that a vote should be taken at once. No doubt they felt that after seventeen years of debate and determination little could be added to the light on the question, or to the influence of even one voter. On the other hand that hope that springs eternal in the human breast had a strong hold on Dr. Petticrew and has very earnest followers, and they felt that they were entitled to a further hearing. Their departure certainly filled the Assembly with a desire to hear them further, and the statements of one or two strong Liberty men that they had heard enough did not meet with a general response, though many extremists on that side cheered it.

At all events, the Assembly adjourned in the afternoon with feelings of excitement and apprehension seldom paralleled in my experience. All that was known was that a certain number of the brethren had gone out, and whether, when, or under what circumstances they would come back was a matter of speculation, though they would come back was a matter of strong hope. On the Assembly resuming in the evening the attendance was vast, and excitement intense. It transpired that simultaneously with the meeting of the Assembly the withdrawn brethren were holding a meeting in the Assembly Hall, The feeling in the Assembly was one of constraint as well as restraint. The rights and dignity of the Assembly had to be considered, as well as the rights and dignity of the party that had withdrawn.

At the opening the Rev. Dr. Gray said that a decision by vote there would create a painful impression, and suggested a policy of conciliation. In reply to a suggestion of the Rev. Mr. Boyd, of Ramoan, that the amendment should be withdrawn, Dr. H. B. Wilson said he would withdraw the amendment if the motion was also withdrawn. Rev. Dr. T. Y. Killen stated that he, with Drs. Morrell, Johnston, and Rodgers, had waited on the brethren, and found them exasperated at the way they had been treated, and the right of freedom of discussion destroyed. He moved that Drs. Wilson (Limerick), N. M. Brown, and himself, with the Rev. Oliver Leitch (Letterkenny) and Sir David Taylor should wait on the brethren. Dr. Brown declined to act, but the other members departed, the Assembly meanwhile being led in prayer by Rev. Dr. Jackson Smyth. After some time Dr. Killen returned, and said they had been most respectfully received, but that the only terms on which they would come back would be that the motion and amendment should be withdrawn, and that Dr. Petticrew's notice of motion should lie on the books for another year. Dr. Killen said there were at least 400 people at the meeting though he rather startled the Assembly by first stating that there were 400 ministers and elders. Rev. Dr. Wilson stated that the brethren had asked the deputation the following question — “Is the General Assembly prepared to act on the suggestion that the motion and amendment be withdrawn, and that Dr. Petticrew’s notice of motion lie on the books for the year?” Rev. Dr. Fleming Stevenson asked if that was done would the agitation cease during the year? and Dr. Wilson said he had asked that, but could get no answer. It was then moved by Mr. M‘Elderry, Ballymoney, and seconded by Rev. Dr. Morrell that the proposal should be accepted; but Dr. Stevenson moved, and Rev. A. Patton seconded, an amendment that it z should only be accepted on the condition that agitation would cease during the year. Dr. Johnston said one of the brethren had told him, “We did not go out on a point of order; we went out to resent the organised tyranny behind it.” It was felt that the condition imposed by the amendment would militate against a settlement; and it was withdrawn, and the motion adopted. Thereupon a message was dispatched to the Assembly Hall, and in a few minutes the deputation, sent out like the dove from the ark, returned with the ministers and elders who had gone out. This was one of the most dramatic scenes I have ever witnessed in any Assembly. In some respects the deputation was tragic in its suddenness and in its suggestiveness. But this was purely dramatic in its characteristics and in its happy ending. It was said of someone that nothing in his life became him like his leaving of it. Of this moving column of men it might be said that nothing became them better than their returning. We all felt, as we felt this week when we heard that Sir Wm. Robertson had accepted the Eastern Command, that the ministerial (and elder) crisis was over, and we rejoiced accordingly and exceedingly. There was great cheering, the cheering of relief and satisfaction.

I do not suggest that there ever was serious danger of secession for the reason I have stated; but there had been separation, and the Rev. A. Robinson said afterwards that they were sorry at the departure and sorry that there had been a separation for a moment. The returning members brought with them a protest, which Mr. Robinson said had been agreed to before the offer had come from the Assembly; but the Clerk and others thought as there had up till then been no record there could be nothing to protest against, and it was arranged that the protest should lie on the table till the following morning, when it could come up in the minutes. Accordingly, on the Saturday morning the minutes were read, and some alterations or emundation made, after which the protest was read, and a committee appointed to answer it. The protest, which was signed by 200 names, stated that after the motion and amendment had been moved and seconded the advocates of the introduction of instruments, apparently by consent, refused to allow any discussion whatever on their own amendment, and by persistent clamour and turbulence utterly unbecoming a Court of Christ carried a demand for an immediate vote, not a single word of discussion on it from their opponents being heard. The answer to the protest, which was a long one, was brought up on the following Tuesday. In reference to the allegation in the sentences quoted, the “Answer” denied that there was any concert, and that  the  clamour’ and turbulence referred to consisted in the persistent and general cry of ‘Vote.’ The Assembly’s own minutes accepted by the protesters testified that ‘a loud and general demand arose for an immediate vote, and the Moderator declared this to be, in his opinion, the manifest sense of the House.’ . . . Certainly the Assembly in its action had no desire to interfere with the freedom of debate, and had no wish to hurt the feelings of any members of the Court or any section of our people.” Dr. Petticrew and some of his friends took exception to some of the statements in the answer to the protest, and a vote was taken as to its reception, when 105 voted in its favour and 55 against it. And the “Answer” passed into the “Minutes” and history.

A report of the proceedings of the “Anti-instrumentalists” was published in the Press at the time. The Rev. Archibald Robinson, however, had not concluded his opening speech until first the informal and afterwards, the formal deputation from the Assembly arrived. He complained that the memorials, with 16,000 signatures, had been practically ignored by the Assembly, and that the convictions of the Presbyterian people had been misrepresented and their rights trampled on. They were not going to secede from the Presbyterian Church, but all he would advise would be that they should keep their tempers cool and organise themselves for the maintenance of Scriptural worship. After the Assembly resolution was read, and each of the members had addressed the meeting in a conciliatory spirit, and inviting them to return to the Assembly. Dr. Petticrew said there had been no premeditation about their action, and then made the suggestion as stated above of the condition on which they would return, namely, the withdrawal of both motion and amendment. Mr. Robinson wished to impress on the deputation that they had not seceded from the Church. When the deputation who had conveyed their condition to the Assembly returned with the announcement of their acceptance, devotional exercises were engaged in, and the members who had signed the protest returned bodily to May Street Church as stated above. Thus ended happily and calmly what on the surface suggested storm and tempest if not division.


From The Witness, 22nd February 1918.