I,- 
 
 
CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 FROM 
 
 Patterson 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSfTV UBRARY 
 
 3 1924 104 036 227 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924104036227 
 
BISHOFS BONUS, 
 SEIBUET COLLEGE, 
 
 DIVINE RIGHT OF PRESBYTERIANISM, 
 
 AND 
 
 DIVINE RIGHT OF EPISCOPACY 
 
 J^" A SERIES OF ESSAYS, 
 
 QrigmalTy published in the Connecticut Herald, from November 2lst, 
 1815, to January gth, I81&, inclusive. 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 A CONCLUDING NUMBER, 
 
 FKOM THE WRITER UNDER THE SIGNATURE Or 
 
 "TOLERATION," 
 fFhich hat never before appeared in print. 
 
 (S^e^ -C-CLpC^a-gdy, 
 
 KEW-HAVEN ; 
 
 PRINTED BY OLIVER STEELE. 
 
 1816. 
 
TO THE REAUEK, 
 
 THE Editor has taken the responsibility of omitting, iir 
 this pamphlet, the notes to the pieces written by "Hamilton,"" 
 and those passages of " A Churchman," and the fable of 
 "^sop," which contain only personal invective, or matter 
 not bearing on the subject ; under the impression that ihef 
 are irrelevant to the argument,, and offensive to. the serious of 
 all denominations. . . 
 
BISHOP'S BONUS, 
 
 :SEJlBUEr COLLEGE, &c. 
 
 -,f 
 No. I. 
 
 Phoenix Premium q/" 50,000 Dollars. 
 
 •rr\ 
 
 1 HIS money came into the Treasury of the State, in 
 ■consequence of the petitioners for the Phoenix Bank of- 
 fering S60,000 to the Assembly for a charter of a Bank 
 of one ancfa lialf miUion dollars capital stock. After 
 the argument was heard before both Houses on the pe- 
 tition, the directors of the Hartford Bank presented a 
 memorial to the Lower House, with an offer to increase 
 their capital stock one million dollars, and to pay the 
 State a premium or bonus of five per cent, on that sum, 
 or fifty thousand dollars, provided the Assembly thought 
 it expedient to enlarge the banking capital in the State. 
 The capital stock of the Phoenix Bank was then fixed 
 at one million dollars; and a premium of five per cent, 
 was charged upon the stockholders of said Bank, and 
 ordered to be paid into the treasury. 
 
 At the same session, twenty thousand dollars of this 
 money was granted to the trustees of the Medical Insti- 
 tution of Yale College .; and the remaining thirty thou- 
 sand dollars, which has since been the subject .of much 
 discussion, tlie Honourable Council originated a bill 
 disposing of twenty thousand dollars to Yale College, 
 and ten thousand dollars to the trustees of the Bishop's 
 Fund, in conformity to the ofier of the petitioners for 
 the Phoenix Bank. 
 
 But it may be doubted by some, whether the peti- 
 tioners for the Phoenix Bank did offer to pay any part of 
 the premium for the privilege of banking, to the trus- 
 
tees of the fund for the support of a Bishop ;* and to 
 remove all doubt and mistake on this point, the words 
 of the petition relating to the subject are given at length : 
 — " And they [the petitioners for the Phcenix Bank] of- 
 fer, moreover, in conformity to the precedents in other 
 States, to pay for the privilege oi" the. ipcorporation 
 herein prayed for, the sum of sixty thousand dollars to 
 be collected (being a Premium to be advanced by the 
 stockholders) as fast as the successive instalments of the 
 capital stoc\ shah be paid in j and to be appropriated, 
 if in the opinion of your Honours it shall be deemed 
 expedient, in such proportions as by your Honours may 
 be thought proper, to the use of the Corporation of 
 Yale CoUegfe, of the Medical Institution established in 
 the City of New-Haven, and to the Corporation of the 
 Trustees of the Fund of the Bjshop of the Episcopal 
 Church in this State, or to be otherwise disposed of for 
 the use of the State, or for any purpose whatever, which 
 to your Honours may seem best. And yovir petitioners^ 
 as in duty bound, will 6ver pray." 
 
 Hence it follows, that individuals, for the sake of a 
 certain privilege to be granted them by the Assembly, 
 <yferp</ to appropriate, for the benefit of the Episcopacy 
 in this State, a sum of money, which, as to amount, was 
 left to the discretion of the Legislature, and which, of 
 course^ as to the appropriation itself, was also left to 
 their discretion. And we are compelled to state, that, 
 after repeated solicitation, the Assembly have refused 
 to comply wjth this offer ; a distinct negative of both 
 Houses havirig been given, the present fall session, to 
 the memorial of the trustees of the Bishop's Fund. 
 
 In consequence of this oiFer, the Honourable Council 
 passed a bill granting 810,000 to the Bishop's Fund ; 
 and at the last spring session, they again voted to grant 
 the same sum for the same purpose ; thereby holding 
 out an expectation to the friends of the Ej)?scopal reli* 
 gion^ that the same members of that honourable body 
 (circumstances being the same) would vote in the same 
 way. 
 
 * How abhorrent to the feelings of some persons, are the words 
 Sishofi, Efiiscofiate, £/tiscofial, and Efiisco/iacy .' Yet, perliaps, jus- 
 tice ought to be done to Episcopalians. 
 
5 
 
 The Lower House voted in favour of the petition for 
 chartering the Phoenix Bank ; but they haVe umformly 
 since voted against the approj)riation for the support of 
 a Bishop. Last spring they gave 40 votes out of 166, 
 ^nd this fall, 39 out of 177 votes, in favour of this claim. 
 
 We are then justified in the assertion, that the Assem- 
 lily have refused the offer of certain individuals to pay a 
 sum of money for the support of tlie Episcopal religion 
 in this State •, which sum of money the Council have re- 
 peatedly declared by their votes to be S 10,000. 
 
 But we state further, that the Assembly did accept of 
 the offer of the same gentlemen to pay a- sum of money 
 to one of the institutions mentioned in said petition, 
 -which institution j'ttuo?/;-.? another denomination of Chris- 
 ^tians, viz^ the Goiigregationahsts or Presbyterians in 
 ithis State. The amount of the money actually appro- 
 priated to the Medical College in this town, appears, by 
 the act of appropriation passed at the same session the 
 Phoenix Bank was incorporated, to be 820,000, to be 
 paid by the stockholders cf said Bank, being a part of 
 the premium they agreed to pay for their charter. That 
 we are not incorrect in this statement, the resolve itself 
 is given : — " Resolved-by this Assembly, that out of the 
 first monies which shall be paid into the treasury of this 
 State, in pursuance of the act incorporating the Phcenix 
 JBank, the treasurer shall he, and he is hereby authorized 
 and required to pay the sum of 1S20.000 to D. Daggett, 
 Wm. LefEngwell, and Charles Denison, Esquires, who 
 are hereby appointed trustees to receive that sum, and 
 the same at their discretion to expend and appropriate 
 for the use and benefit of the Medical Institution of Yale 
 College, in promotion of the objects of said institution." 
 
 But we are also to prove, that the Medical Institution 
 of Yale College favours the Preqbyterians ; and for this 
 purpose we shall have recourse to the records of Yale 
 College, the Medical Institution being a branch of that 
 College. The following is the cre-ef/ assented to by the 
 cfiicers of A0//2 Yale College and the Medical Institution, 
 
 "I, A. B, being chosen a fellow cf Yale College, do 
 hereby declare, that I believe that the Assemb/fs Cate- 
 jchism and the Confession of Faith, received and estab- 
 lished in the churches of this colony, and in this College, 
 
6 
 
 contain a true and just summary of the most important 
 doctrines of the Christian religion ; and that the true 
 sense of the sacred Scriptures is justly collected and 
 summed up in those expositions. And all expositions 
 of Scripture, pretending to deduce any doctrine or posi- 
 tions contrary to said doctrines laid down in those com- 
 posures, I believe are wrong and erroneous. And I will 
 take all reasonable measures, and sucli as Christian pru- 
 dence may direct, in my place and station, to continue 
 and propagate the doctrines contained in the summaries 
 of religion in this college, and transmit them to all fu- 
 ture successions and generations ; and use the like mea- 
 sures to prevent the contrary doctrines from prevailing 
 in this society. 
 
 " I do also consent to the rule of church disiplince, es- 
 tablisjied in the ecclesiastical constitution of the church- 
 es of this colony. A. B." 
 
 The above form of a creed, and the following vpte, 
 will be found in President Clap's History of Yale Col- 
 lege, pages 64 and 65 ; which were agreed upon at a 
 meeting of the President and Fellows, Nov. 21st, 1753, 
 and which are believed to be in full force, as to the sub- 
 st^ance, at the present xiay. 
 
 "■ ^^oted, That every person who shall be chosen Pres- 
 ident, Fellow, Professor of Divinity, or Tutor, in this 
 College, shall give his consent to the rules of church dis- 
 «ipHne established in the ecclesiastical constitution of 
 the churches of this colony; it being understood, that our 
 ecclesiastical constitution may admit of additions or al- 
 terations in such circumstances as, according to our con- 
 fession of faith, are to be regulated by the light of na- 
 ture and the rules of Christian prudence. And it is ss- 
 pecially declared, that if any person shall deny the valid- 
 ity of the ordination of the ministers of this colony, 
 commonly called Presbyterian or Congregational, or 
 shall hold that it is necessary or convenient that such 
 ministers should be re-ordained, in order to render their 
 administrations valid, it shall be deemed an essential de- 
 parture from our ecclesiastical constitution, and inconsis^ 
 tent with the intentions of the founders of this College, 
 that such a person should be chosen an officer in it.'* 
 
The Presbyterians or Congregationalists are, then> 
 favoured with office, and the Episcopalians are excluded 
 from holding offices in Yale College and in the Medical 
 Institution of said College ; the officers of the Medica! 
 Institution being compelled, we believe, to subscribe to 
 the same established creed with the President, Profess- 
 ors and Tutors of Yale College. Should we, however, 
 be inaccurate in these particulars, we will, without de- 
 lay, publish the creeds or statutes now in use. At all 
 events, let the creed be perfectly liberal and sound, it is 
 well known that the whole influence of the establishment 
 is with the Mother College. In the pamphlet contain- 
 ing the laws of this institution, on the 6th page, are the 
 two following articles : — '•'■ Art. 1. The government of 
 the institution shall be vested in the President and Aca- 
 demical and Medical Professors, who shall be styled 
 The Faculty of the Medical College." " 2. The Presi- 
 dent shall cali the meetings of the Faculty : no vote 
 shall be valid without his consent : and. when the mem- 
 bers present shall be equally divided, the President shall 
 have a casting vote." And on the 1st page, where is 
 the Act establishing said institution, respecting the nom- 
 ination and appointment of officers, are these words : 
 " And there shall be a joint committee of an equal num- 
 ber of persons, appointed by the Convention of the Med- 
 ical Society and Corporation of Yale College, who shall 
 make a nomination ; from which nomination ^he afore- 
 said Professors shall be chosen by the Corporation." 
 
 And have we not now proved, that the Legislature of 
 Connecticut, having granted the privilege of banking to 
 the petitioners of the Phoenix Bank, for S50,000 ; hav- 
 ing ordered the whole sum into the treasury of the State, 
 and having drawn from thence S20,000 out of the 
 850,000, for the support of the Medical Institution, 
 •wWich favours anot/ter denomination of Clu-istians ; hav- 
 ing refpsed to grant a dollar of this money to the trus- 
 tees of the Bishop's Fund ; and having heretofore grant- 
 ed banking privileges to individuals, without a premium 
 or consideration in money ; we ask then, that from these 
 facts brought together, is not the case fairly made out, 
 that the Legislature has not dealt out the same measure 
 of beneficence to the E,piscopalians and to the Presbyte- 
 
8' 
 
 rians-; that the lattel- have been preferred, and the Epis- 
 copaUans have been rejected ? 
 
 We will take another view of this important clainj, in 
 very few words ; which is, that, although the Assembly 
 rejected the petition, yet, by granting the Baijk to the 
 petitioners, and piitting tiie premium into the treasury, 
 and granting from thence ix part of said premium to one 
 of the corppratiops, suggested in the petition, they have 
 ■ eoTr.mitted.ihemselves in good faith to make the grants to 
 the other corporations connected with it in the same pe- 
 tition. , It is not the common practice of the Assembly 
 to grant bank charters upQn petitions. Bills are introdu- 
 ced into one of the Houses, and grants made in nearly 
 the same form and manner, which were adopted with 
 respect to the Phoenix Bank charter. Not acting di- 
 rectly upon petitions, postponing or negativing them, 
 but in a few hours afterwards granting the substance of 
 what they pray for, are believed to bejbrnis of proceed- 
 ing not material. It is mere subterfuge to say that the 
 petition was hot granted, But should we admit, that in 
 consequence of the rejection, the subsequent grant to 
 the Medical Institution does not bind the Legislature in 
 good conscience to make the grant to the Episcopalians,, 
 (vfhich admission, however, we do not make.) still the 
 question would occur, why did the Assembly so exer- 
 qise their discretion as to reject the petition? The Couu' 
 eil, which was the only House that voted against this pe- 
 tition, certainly did not consider their vote as precluding 
 th^m from the discretion of making the appropriation we 
 ^low claim ; for they did vote, in a day or two after, to 
 grant S 10,000 to the Bishop's Fund. 
 
 And should there be an unwise exercise of discretion, 
 or should a right or pledge be witliheld, or should there 
 be an offer rejected, which ought to be accepted on the 
 great principles either of toleration, of liberality, of im- 
 partiality, of justice, of law, or of equity, let the steps 
 of the Assembly with cheerfulness be retraced. These 
 are principles worthy the practice and enforcement of 
 legislators. They are the primary and fundamental prin- 
 ciples of government. They cement the affections of 
 the great body of the people. They exalt and adorn a 
 nation. They dignify its rulers* 
 
9 
 
 But it may be inquired, Do the Episcopalians complain 
 that the Medical Institution has had g20,000 granted by 
 the State, which was a part of the Phoenix premium ? 
 that Yale College has had frequent grants of money from 
 the treasury ? that a test of religious faith is Required of 
 the officers of that seminary ? and that this creed is 
 taught the students ? No such complaints will be made, 
 or ought to exist, provided the Legislature will grant 
 them, what they have often prayed for in vain, their part 
 of the Phoenix premium ; and provided they will also 
 grant a charter for a College, where the Episcopalians 
 can educate their children in their own faith and mode 
 of worship. Until these grants are made, it appears to 
 the writer, that their complaints are founded on a deep 
 and thorough consciousness that justice is on their side. 
 
 It is a misfortune, that the Episcopalians do not be- 
 lieve that the ordinations of the Presbyterian Clergy are 
 not conformable to Scripture ; and it is a misfortune, 
 that they do not believe in the creed established in Yale 
 College. It is so great a misfortune, that when individ- 
 uals are willing-^ to advance money, as in the case be- 
 fore us, for the support of Episcopacy, the State has ta- 
 ken it for their own purposes, and then paid out a.part-\ 
 of it to the support of Presbyterianism. It is so great 
 a misfortune, that, without abjuring his faith, an Epis- 
 copalian cannot become an officer in Yale College, cither 
 tutor, professor, or president. Yet he has the good for- 
 tune to be allowed to send his sons to be educated and 
 indoctrinated in Vincent's Catechism and the Saybrook 
 Platform in said college. Yet he has the good fortune 
 to pay taxes for the support of the government of this 
 State, and for that of the college. But he has the seri- 
 
 * Mr. Gould, of Litchfield, in the closing argument for the Bank, 
 stated, before both liousses, that it was the tnish of the petitioners to 
 apply one third of the premium to Yale Colltge, one third to the 
 Medical Insiitution, and one third to the Bishop's Fund. 
 
 t The Medical Institution has had g20,000 out of 850,000 al- 
 ready granted by the State, more than one third; and its officers 
 have presented a petition to the Assembly, which is postponed to 
 the next session; by means of which, the remaining g30,000 is 
 expected to be granted to it and to Yale College, under the speciou* 
 name of a " Lunatic Hospital and State Poor-House." 
 
 B 
 
10 
 
 ous unhappiness of being sensible that he does npt en- 
 joy equal rights, in regard to religion, with other denoni- 
 inations of Christians. Yet let him, however, with full 
 conviction of its high importance, (notwithstanding this 
 hard condition in a land of freedbtaj) as the Catechism 
 enjoins,. '■'■ honour tin4 obey the civil authoriiy ;^'' and let 
 hini, with steady mind and meek spirit^ '■'■ learn and la- 
 bour truly to ^et his own thing, and to do his duty in that 
 state of life unto which it shall please God to call him /'' 
 always remembering, that "in every nation, he that 
 feareth God, and worketh righteousness, -will be accepted 
 <fhim:' TOLERATION. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Mr. Editor, 
 
 IN your last number, I observed a long piece on the 
 subject of the Phoenix Bonus and Bishop's Fund, under 
 the signature of "Toleration;" a piece, which, in my 
 view, Vi^as written with more zeal than knowledge, and 
 more passion than truth. The object of the writer 
 seems to be, to convince the good people of this State, 
 that their Government is partial and unjust ; that Yale 
 Gollege, which is our pride and ^oi-y, and the Medical 
 Institution connected with it, are mere seminaries of 
 bigotry and intolerance ; and that, to make all things 
 tight, It IS highly proper that S 10,000 of the Phcenix 
 lionus should be immediately appropriated to the sup- 
 port of a Bishop, and a new Episcopal Gollege estab- 
 lished, where the more liberal doctrines of that Sect, 
 (particularly the Divine Right of Bishops,)' ttii*ht be du- 
 ly inculcated and taught. If I have mistaken his ob- 
 ject, I feel confident, from the specious name which this 
 ingenious Writer has assumed, that he-will correct me 
 with all due humility and candour. 
 
 Perhaps, Mr. Editor, it is owing to my not having so 
 enlarged views as this writer, that he appears to ml to 
 have wholly failed of accomplishing any part of the grand 
 object which he has attempted. Were he to ceSsure 
 the Legislature for ever having listened to the proposi- 
 tion of a Bonus/(a thing which cannot be vindifatcd on 
 
u 
 
 the ground of either morality or policy^) I should acqui- 
 esce : but when he can pass over this, and only blame 
 them for not having appropriated at least a part of this 
 detestable Bonus to the support of Episcopacy, I am as- 
 tonished at the obliquity of this man's mind, and almost 
 led to doubt the honesty of his statements, and the 
 soundness of his conclusions. He will pardon me, (and 
 I think your readers will also,) if, without minutely 
 pointing out his unfair omissions of facts which were 
 material, I proceed to give a short and condensed state- 
 ment of the facts on this subject, as they have beeq 
 once and again proved, to the satisfaction of even can- 
 did Episcopalians, before the Legislature. 
 
 In the fall of 1813, while the Treasury was groaning 
 under the expenses of the M'ar, a committee of finance 
 recommended to the Legislature, among other sources 
 of revenue, the taking of a fine or tax, upon the grant- 
 ing of Bank charters, for the use of the State. 
 
 Before the spring session of 1814, in ponsequencd of 
 that recommendation undoubtedly, the petitionees for 
 the Phoenix Bank circulated printed copies of their pe- 
 tition (a thing rather unusual) all over the State ; in 
 which they offered, if the Legislature would grant then^ 
 a Bank charter with 81,560,000 capital, "in conformi- 
 ty to precedents in other States, io pay into the treasury 
 ef this State, for the benefit of the State, the. sum of 
 S60,000, to be collected by a tax or premium of 4 per 
 centum," &c. In this petition, dated February, 1814, 
 and signed by a great number of names, npt one word 
 is said of givirig part of the money to the Bishop's Fund, 
 or any other institution. When the petition came be^ 
 fore the Assembly, it being thought perhaps that there 
 had not been quite management enough to make it go 
 down, the petition was found to have been altered so as 
 to establish a Branch at Litchfield ; and in lieu of the 
 clause above quoted, the following had been substitu- 
 ted : — " And they offer, jn conformity, &c. to pay for 
 the privilege of the incorporation herein prayed for, the 
 sum of S60,000, &c. to be appropriated, if in the opin- 
 ion of yotir Honours it shall be deemed expedient, in such 
 proportion as by your Honours may be thought proper, 
 to the use of the Corporation of Yale College, of the 
 
12 
 
 Medical Institution in the city of New- Haven, and to 
 the Corporation of the Trustees of the Fund of the Bish- 
 op of the Episcopal Church in this State, or to be other- 
 wise disposed of for the use of the State, or for any pur- 
 pose -whatever, which to your Honours may seem best." — 
 The petition, thus altered, though it does not bind the 
 Legislature at all in their appropriation of the moneys 
 instead of the respectable list of subscriber-s to the~ ori- 
 ginal petition, had only three names to it, two of whom 
 are Episcopalians, and, I believe, Trustees of the Bish- 
 op's Fund. By what authority, and for what purpose, 
 these gentlemen presumed to make this alteration, they 
 can best tell. 
 
 In this shape, however, the petitioners arrogantly 
 pointing out to the Legislature how this Bonus might be 
 appropriated, the petition passed the Lower House, but 
 was instantly rejected in the Council, on the ground, it 
 is presumed, of the exceptionable clause respecting the 
 appropriatioA of the Bonus. A committee of confer- 
 ence was appointed from the two Houses : but before 
 they reported, a Bill for a public Act, entirely independ- 
 ent of any petition, and purged of the exceptionable 
 clause, and similar to the one by which the Phoenix 
 Bank is now established, was introduced into the Coun- 
 cil, and negatived. It was then introduced into the 
 House of Representatives, and passed in its present 
 form, to which the Council finally agreed. And thus .: 
 grew up the Phoenix Bank, the child of Intrigue, and 
 the mother of Discord. 
 
 From the present charter, it will be seen that the Bank 
 were to '■'■pay into the treasury of this State:, for the use 
 of the State," the sum of 850,000, which sum the State 
 had a right, by the charter, to subscribe and pay into said 
 Bank, and receive therefor shares in the stock of said 
 Bank,2A SlOO a share, transferable at the pleasure of 
 the, General Assembly. In this Act, as in the original 
 petition, the premiurn given is considered as a tax upon 
 the institution yor the use of the State : it has (6very dol- 
 lar of which is paid) long since been expended for the 
 use of the State ;* and every taxable individual of the 
 
 » I consider the Medical College a public insvitution, and not the 
 /bundling of any Seci. 
 
13 
 
 State (together with the evil) has reaped the benefit 
 of it. 
 
 But, says this writer, these petitioners had reasonable 
 ground to expect, that the Bishop's Fund would have 
 part of this Bonus, though the Legislature did not bind 
 themselves to give it. What these three modest peti- 
 tioners, who undertook to tell the Assehably how they 
 might use this money, expected, I neither know nor 
 care : but this I know, that neither they nor any body 
 else had any right to expect, that what was flatly and re- 
 peatedly denied them, would be granted. When the 
 bill, which is now the charter of the Bank, and which 
 was introduced because it was thought the Legislature 
 never would grant the petition with three signers, (that 
 petition disclosing too much of the cloven foot,) was on 
 its passage in the Lower House, a member moved to 
 amend it, by inserting something like the clause from 
 the petition alluded to, respecting the appropriation of 
 the Bonus ; but the House, as if determined to guard 
 against all misrepresentations and misconstructions of 
 such men as the writer of " Toleration," rejected the 
 amendment. After the bill passed, a similar attempt 
 was again made in the same House, and met the same 
 fate. Thus the House of Representatives, at the time 
 and on the spot, by two successive votes, did every thing 
 in their power to crush all vain hopes, and decidedly 
 spoTce this language to the world ; that with respect to 
 this Bonus, they never meant to, and they never would, 
 make themselves trustees or debtors to the Bishop's 
 Fund, or to any other institution. From the time the 
 insidious petition was first negatived by the Council, 
 during the whole session, till the Bank was finally incor- 
 porated by a public Act, independent of arty petition ; 
 all they would say, respecting this money, was, " It shall 
 go into the treasury of this State, for the use of the State" 
 They knew, that owing to the expenses of the war, the 
 State wanted money, and that they were legislating for 
 the general interest of the State, and not for the Episco- 
 palians, the Baptists, the Methodists, or Presbyterians, 
 as separate' and distinct classes from the great body of 
 their constituents. 
 
lathe fan of 1814, an attempt was matk^on the part 
 <jf the Trustees of the Bishop's Fund, to procure what 
 some Churchmen, in the teeth of the above facts, call 
 t^ir share of the Bonus. Only thirty-eight votes in 
 the House of Representatives countenanced the attempt 
 
 In the spring of 1815, with all the influence which 
 their strange union with Yale College at that time was 
 calculated to produce, they procured in the same body 
 only forty votes against one hundred and twenty-eight. 
 
 In, the fall of 1815, they collected all their forces; 
 they employed two of the ablest Counsel in the State, 
 who were heard at full length, without any check or re- 
 straint, or any one to lisp a syllable in answer to their 
 elaborate statements before both Houses ; and the re- 
 sult was, One vote for the application in the Upper- 
 iHouse, and thirtyTnipe votes against one hundred and 
 thirty -eight in the House of Representatives — a dead 
 lass of eleven votes in the House, and of all but One in 
 the Council, since spring. At every step of the inves- 
 tigation, on this last occasion, the application lost friends > 
 and even many of those whose religious feelings inter- 
 ested them in its favour, were candid enough to acknow- 
 ledge that their claim was entirely groundless, and any 
 further perseverance in it worse tliaq hopeless. 
 
 This appropriatipli, then, which the writer I am an- 
 swering so raixch covets, has been most peremptorily • 
 negatived, on five different occasions, and in as manydif-t 
 fefjgnt shapes, and is finally forsi^ken by some who were 
 originally it§ friends, and even by many of those who 
 are most concerned in its support. Did " Toleration" 
 ever know a measure, which had the least foundation in 
 reason or cqmmon sense^ meet with such overwhelming, 
 and every time increasing, majorities ? The truth is, 
 (we hope,) that the age of intrigue and management has 
 got th? g@-by in our Legislature, and that hereafter the 
 doctrine of expediency, (always the ple3 of faction, acnd 
 always false,) will be made to give way to the doctrine 
 ©f right. 
 
 In endeavouring to give a condensed^nd connected 
 view of this part of the subject, I know I l*ave not ani- 
 madverted upon all that is erroneous and- censurable, in 
 the disjointed piece of "Toleration;" but with respect 
 
15 
 
 to what is omitted, and particularly as to his unwairant- 
 able attack on Yale College and the Medical Institution^ 
 if some other writer does not do himjustice, he may 
 expect to hear from me again. 
 
 No. III. 
 Mr. Steele, 
 
 Sir — Before we exercise our privilege of closing \h& 
 argument in favour of the Episcopalians to their part of 
 the '■'■detestable Bonus," it may not be a work of super- 
 erogation to give due notice of the unstable ground on 
 which our opponents stand. 
 
 It seems, then, that the management between the Houj 
 ses, as detailed by your correspondent in the last Herald^ 
 was not to avoid receiving the avails of taxes from the 
 pockets of the people, into the treasury, by means of the 
 sale of bank charters : it was not to reject the offer of 
 iS 50,000 from the two ^Meojfta/ petitioners of the. Phoe- 
 nix Bank ; and it was not to refuse the offer of taxes to 
 carry on the war in which, we were then engaged : but 
 this said tnanagement had for its object the endowment 
 of that " foundling of a sect," the Medical Institution,, 
 and its nurseling, the Lunatic Hospital and State Poor- 
 House, (the boundaries o£ which, we understand, have 
 been marked out on the land of the gentleman, who sold 
 the house for the Medical College, and who is the trea- 
 surer of Yale College ;) and that, in fact, it had for its 
 object the building up of one sect, and the keeping cfowrt 
 of Episcopalians. S20,000 have been appropriated, not 
 for the relief of the burdens of the people in waging war 
 against Great-Britain, but for the growth of the Medi- 
 cal Institution : And now the remaining 830,000 is pe- 
 titioned for, to establish the Lunatic Hospital and State 
 Poor-House, with the same test ef religious /aith, we pre- 
 sume ; and this, too, with the consent of the President 
 of Yale College, and with the ijifluence of the principal 
 members of the Assembly, who have opposed the claim 
 of the Trustees of the Bishop's Fund. 
 
 Your paper. Sir, will not be occupied by us next 
 week, with the expectation that the vote of the Corpo- 
 
16 
 
 ration of Yale College will be produced, a^ltering men- 
 tially the creed and vote we published from President; 
 Clap's history of that institution ; and that proof will be 
 furnished, that Doctor Smith, a principal Professor of 
 the Medical College, did not read in public, a creed, as 
 his own, agreeing in the important points with the one 
 we extracted and published from the said records of 
 Yale College. TOLERATION. 
 
 No. IV. 
 To Connecticut Episcopalians. 
 
 IT will be nothing new to inform you, that the peti- 
 tion of the Trustees to your Bishop's Fund, for a part 
 of the 50,000 dollars paid into the treasury by the Phoe- 
 nix Bank, received its finishing stroke at the late session 
 of the Legislature. A force quite overwhelming, (as 
 the yeas and nays, which have just passed the rounds of 
 the newspapers, inform us,) prostrated the petition on 
 the floor of the House of Representatives. And, as if 
 this were not sufficient — as if it were not enough to 
 strangle our claim in the popular branch of the Legis- 
 lature ; the Hon. Council, to ' make assurance doubly 
 sure,' (as a writer in the last Herald triumphantly tells 
 us,) advanced in a body, and very valiantly belaboured 
 the fallen foe with an almost unanimous vote. 
 
 ' " How if he should prove counterfeit too, and rise ? I am afraid 
 "he would prove the belter counterfeit: therefore I'll make him 
 " sure ; yea, and I'll swear / kiil'd him." 
 
 Yes, strange as it may seem, the same members of 
 the same Council, who have apparently', heretofore, been 
 the sworn advocates of your claim — the same men who, 
 on former occasions, voted in favour, of what they were 
 then not afraid to term the " equity" of the petition ; 
 have, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, bolted 
 from their object, and at once discovered that all their 
 old opinions were erroneous, their former theories falla- 
 cious. Sudden conversions, we are told, generally pro- 
 duce the most zealous proselytes. Never was the adage 
 more faithfully fulfilled, than in the case before us. The 
 
IT 
 
 mild, the firm, the upright Council of ■Connecticut, we 
 are to believe, were metamorphosed in a moment— their 
 ideas turned quite around, and, after a short struggle of 
 conflicting feelings, have at last gone home to their con- 
 stituents, filled with new zeal, and overflowing with 
 fresh fervour, And here the matter should in all con- 
 science have rested. A sight of the legislative drill 
 should not have disturbed our nerves — the marchings 
 and countermarchings, the windings and doublings, of 
 the honourable phalanx, might have passed in silent 
 review before us. But when these manceuvres are puff- 
 ed off in print, as cause of exultation — when you are 
 told, by way of triumph, that only " one" of the Hon- 
 ourable Council was bold enough tore-assert his former 
 opinion— rand, above all, when you arc tauntingly told, 
 that because the petitioners for the Bank; (many of 
 whom were Episcopaliaiis,) respectfully propose^ to 
 give a part of the Bonus for^the support of a Bishop ; 
 .that therefore their petition was "insidious" — that it 
 disclosed a " cloven foot" — when the venerable Head of 
 our Church is thus impiously cqmpared to the heel of 
 Satan, our adversaries must presume much, very much, 
 upon your forbearance^-they must indeed suppose that 
 ■your nerves are leaden, and your hearts cold and callous 
 as a tomb -stone. 
 
 Think you that I am cplouring this account too high- 
 ly ? Look for yourselves, at the . production of a writer 
 in the last Herald, in answer to an unvarnished state- 
 ment of facts, which, had previously appeared under the 
 signature of" Toleratiow :" and then tell me, if what I. 
 have only put here as supposition, is not reality ? And 
 for what is all this ? Why, you_ haye dared ; yes, you, 
 Episcopalians, have had the unparalleled impudence to 
 say, that yod have an equitable claim to a part of this 
 Bonus ; when, in truth, you have no claim in conscience, 
 no equity in your favour : at least, so say the leaders 
 of the Lower House ; and so, at last, echo the Honora- 
 ble Council. 
 
 Such an answer to your petition, notwithstanding only 
 " One" refused his assent to it in the Upper House, 
 comes from the honourable body, at least, in rather ii 
 C 
 
18 
 
 questionable and aukward shape. Crooked and eluHisf 
 as it is, however, I regret, (yes, in the siMcrity of my 
 soal I regret,) that the HoriOurablte Council had not uni- 
 formly held out the same language towards us : we 
 might then, at least,, carry with us the consolation, that 
 the Honourable Council-, whotn Most of us have hereto- 
 fore supported with our iniS'uence and our votes, had 
 VQUsistently difFered with us in opinion. 
 
 But how stands this question of right, about which 
 so much has been said ? The petitionfers fot the Phee- 
 nix Bank j the men whose money has since been paid 
 into the treasury ; proposed to pay for their charter, 
 §60,000 y one jjortion of which to be paid to Yale, Col- 
 lege ; a second cut to the PedicalEstablisbfiaent conneic- 
 ted with the College^ and a third portion to the Bishep^ 
 Fund. Our adversaries herfe tell us, of rather, the adver- 
 sary of " Toleration'* tellsthe public, that in the winter 
 of 1814j there wcj a petition for a Bank circulated 
 throughout the Stafe^ which said hot one word about 
 the Bishop's Fund — a case slmost in point ; but it un- 
 fortunately turns out, that this petition, so silent on the 
 Subject of the Bishop''s Fund, was never _^brought be«- 
 fore the Legislature— a sort of Irish j^ayevy never made. 
 Will the gentleman's logic carry him so far, as to say 
 that this circumstance weakens the equity of ®ur case ; 
 when he himself, in the same breath, is forced to admib 
 that the enlt/ petition ever known to the Assembly on 
 this subject, contained a fffoposition to give the Bish- 
 op's Fund the proportion above alluded to ? As well 
 might he draw in the fact, that the Yazoo claimants 
 had handed the draft of a petition through the State for 
 subscribers. And as little can the gentleman's sly in- 
 sinuation avail him, that the three respectable men se- 
 lected by the applicants to sign the petition, dish&nestly^ 
 drafted a petition to answer their individual views* You, 
 I know, will require sometlung more to convince you 
 of the roguery of these men, than an anonymous insin- 
 uation, however cunningly it may slant towards you. 
 But we are told that the petition does not " bind the 
 Legislature at all, in their appropriation ci the monfey," 
 because there is a sentence in it which authorizes them, 
 if they choose, to grant the money to any other State 
 
19 
 
 jHirpose, ■*' which to their Honours may seem best ;" 
 and this clause is to ojierate as a sort of detergent, 
 which cleanses the conscience from any claim that can 
 possibly grow out of the fact of passing the petition. — 
 And is it seriously attempted to gull you by this ^se- 
 cies of " special pleading ?" Ask any man conversant 
 with legislative proceedings, how all petitions are draft- 
 ed which are broiaght b^ore 'the Legislature ; and he 
 will tell you, that, as a matter of respect, the prayer of 
 &. petition invariably winds up by leaving it at the dis- 
 cretion of the Legislature, " to grant such other relifef 
 as to their Honours may seem best ;" " or in some oth- 
 •er way to grant relief," &c. And this follows as regu- 
 larly, as a man subscribes himself a " humble servant," 
 in his letters. And yet it would be thought rather a 
 strange sort of legislation, after granting tiie petition of 
 a man, for instance, who prays to have his body freed 
 from arrest, " or for such other relief as to their Hon- 
 ours may seem best," if the same Legislature should 
 sentence him to be shot, bj way of granting suck 
 ,^' other relief as to their Honours seemed best" 
 
 I feel safe, then, in again asserting, liiat the fair and 
 lionest construction of the petition of the Bank Appli- 
 cants, (the men whose money the Treasury has re- 
 ceived,) was, that the Bishop's Fund should receive a 
 portion of the Bonijs, as well as Yale College, or the 
 Medical Institution connected with the College. This 
 petition, notwithstanding the " exceptionable clause," 
 as anti-" Toleration" calls the proposal for distributing 
 the Bonus, passed the Lower House at that time by a 
 large majority. And although the Upper House voted 
 against liie j&eri«zort, yet they at the same session grant- 
 ,ed a Bank charter to the Petitioners, and received from 
 the Bank 50,000 dollars of the identical Bonus, which 
 had been offered in the petition. But we are told 
 again, and again, that the petition was defunct — that it 
 was squeezed to death between the two Houses — and 
 that the money which the Petitioners paid for their 
 charter, went into the treasury, the same as other State 
 funds. How is the fact ? 1 he Act incoiporatihg the 
 Bank, as it finally passed, and as it now stands, was the 
 offspring of the Upper House ; it originated there, and 
 
20 
 
 there received its finish. Let us then look atthe pro- 
 ceedings of the Council,, and see in what light they 
 looked at the charter, and the Bonus required by it. 
 
 Turn to the records of the Council, and you find, that 
 immediately after the Bank was incorporated, and, as it 
 were, on the back of this very charter, a Resolution is 
 drawn up, and passed, (as in good faith it ought to have 
 been,) granting 20,000 dollars to the Medical Establish- 
 ment of Yale College, and 10,000 dollars to the Bishop's 
 Fund — Not a grant of money in the Treasury, or of 
 '' State Funds"-^^No, they did not at that time act as if 
 they considered the State entitled to the Bonus, except 
 as the trustees of the institutions mentioned in the origi- 
 nal petition. The language of the resolution was, that 
 *' out of the first monies which shall be paid into the 
 treasury of this State, z'ra pursuance of the Act incorpo- 
 rating the Phcenix Bank, the treasurer shall be and he 
 is hereby authorized and required to pay," &c. 'I'his 
 resolution, in part, took with the Lower House — they 
 acquiesced in the grant of 20,000 dbllars of the money 
 to the Medical Institution.; and this sum, as I suppose-, 
 has since been paid. Not, so, however, with the propo- 
 sition which was to favour Episcopacy ; the 10,000 dol- 
 lars destined for the Bishop's Fund was (for reasons best 
 known to the gentlemen who opposed it) arrested in its 
 progress by the LoWer.; House— by the same Lower 
 House .which had but just; befpre, bya full mgjority^ 
 granted the petition with' all its provisions. Here ended 
 the business for the spring session of 1814. 
 
 In the fall of the same year, the Trustees to your 
 Bishop's Fund appeared before the Legislature, and ask- 
 ed for a portion of , the 50,000 dollars. Their claim was 
 at that time answered various ways. They were told, 
 among, other things, that the country was then at war ; 
 that the Treasury w»s in want of the money ; and that, 
 however just the claim might be, it pould not at any 
 rate be listened to at that time. , After the peace, at the 
 spring session of 1815, when the State was relieved 
 from its embarrassments, the claim was again present- 
 ed. The Honourable Council still .remained firm in 
 our favour ; and, by a majority of eleven to two, stamp- 
 .cd this charter with another declaration, that we were 
 
21 
 
 fairly entitled to 10,000 dollars of the Bonus which it 
 yielded. Indeed, an influential member of the Council 
 at that time, a Presbyterian himself, and now an hon- 
 ourable judge, as I am told, declared, that although 
 we could not maintain an action at law, for the recove- 
 ry of the money, yet that our claim was as clear in con- 
 science, as any that- he could imagine : And, unless I 
 am much misinformed, his Excellency the Governor, 
 who presided at the board at the time the Bank was in- 
 corporated, and who was perfectly well acquainted with 
 all the attendant circumstances, has repeatedly express- 
 ed himself in terms, nearly as strong as those above re- 
 cited, in favour of our claim. The Lower House, 
 however, still refused us the money ; and, for the honour 
 of our State, I wish the case ended here ; but truth 
 compels me to carry you one step further in the his- 
 tory. 
 
 At the last October session of the Assembly, the 
 Trustees once more spread their case before the con- 
 sciences of the Legislature ; and, unaccountable as it 
 may seem, the Upper House, with onl)' " one" excep- 
 iion, completely wheeled about in their opinions, and, by 
 a majority " overwhelming" indeed, fell in with the 
 Lower 'House, and voted down the claim, which they 
 had ever before, by a majority quite as " overwhelm- 
 ing," been so instrumental in creating and defending. ' 
 
 A petition is now pending before the Legislature, 
 from the Medical establishment of the College, for the 
 remaining thirty of the fifty thousand dollars ; and from 
 the reception it met with, at the last session of the Le- 
 gislature, we may very safely calculate that the petition- 
 ers will receive the balance of the Bonus, at the next 
 session. And you. Episcopalians, in the face of these 
 facts, are told that you have been guilty of an unpardon- 
 able sin, for having suggested to a Presbyterian Assem- 
 bly that you have any just claim, even for a fifth part of 
 the 50,000 dollars. You must be faught to believe that 
 Yale College, with its professions of faith and test creeds, 
 is as much the institution of one sect as another ; and 
 that therefore the College, or its branches, ought to have 
 the whole of the Bonus. 
 
22 
 
 Suffer Hie, however, to ask, DM the vote dF:te^ Low, 
 er House, on the original petition for the Bank, whicl| 
 paid the money, mean nothing I Do the repeated votes 
 of the Council (with all the facts before them) mean no- 
 thing ? Ox must you believe, that the Hon. Council only 
 meant to amuse you by bobbing the bait, till you Jaad 
 dangled long enough in their train ; and at last to leave 
 you, after flattering you one moment, and flogging. you 
 the next? Whatever your rights may be, you have at 
 least aright to ask these questions, and a right to.de- 
 mand an answer. If a satisfactory answer can be given, 
 no one will more cheerfully listen to it, than the person 
 who addresses you. 
 
 A CHURCHMAN. 
 
 No. V. ,^ 
 
 THE a«thor of the late attack upon the LegislatuFS. 
 and literary institutions of this State wOuld make th« 
 public believe, that the sect of Christians, of which he 
 appears to be a zealoois^ member, are treated with great 
 intolerance in Connecticut. Does he believe this him- 
 self? I fear he does not even know the import of the 
 word " Toleration," which he has taken as his signa- 
 ture. In England, ^' where bishops wear their mitred 
 fronts in courts and parliament," Episcopacy is estab- 
 lished by law; and every officer of the army and navyj 
 and every civil officer, from the k-iag down to a consta- 
 ble, must belong to the established church ; and is com- 
 pelledy even under the severest penalties, to partake of 
 the sacrament according to the rites of that church-; and 
 every teacher in endowed schools and colleges, -is com- 
 pelled reverently to frequent the worship (5 the estab- 
 lished church, and declare his conformity to the Episco- 
 pial Liturgy ; and every -man in the kingdom, of what- 
 ever denomination, is forced to pay for the support of 
 the Episcopal ministry. And yet, very wise men have 
 thought all this not at all inconsistent with "toleration" 
 to other sects ; and I dare say, the writer in question 
 could hardly make up his motith -to pronouiiee the 
 Church of England intolerant. Not that he would es- 
 
tablkh the Engfish code here, if he had it in his power : 
 but I do believe,^ that his prejudices are so strong on this 
 subject, as to blind him against the faults of his own 
 sect^ and make him im^ne they are objects of perse- 
 cution, when they are really in possession of every priv- 
 ilege which they can rationaiUy desire, and which theif 
 Fellow- Christians (he must pardon the expression) a- 
 round them enjoy. The truth is, td^ration has never 
 been known any where but in the United States, and no- 
 where can it be found more universal and more free 
 than m the State of Connecticut. Here we all enjoy an 
 equality of privileges : no sect is excluded from offices : 
 our religious sentiments are left free as air ; and every 
 man is permitted to take his own conscience and the 
 Scriptures as his only rule of faith. Why then does 
 this writer attempt to excite jealbusies and quarrelling 
 among the different sects of Christians, and labour to 
 liiake one party believe they dre the subjects of perse- 
 cutions and opipressionsj of which the other party never 
 dreamed ? arid, in the midst of the clamour which he 
 makes, ask for the Episcopaliansj what no man would 
 ever presume to ask for any other sect? 
 
 He takes it for granted, that Yale College is the coU 
 lege of a sect , and undertakes to show, that Episcopa- 
 lians are not admitted to an equal share of privileges in 
 this institution J and he eveh involves the Medical In- 
 stitution in the same condemnation. It cannot be, thai 
 the writer speaks the sentiments of the great body of in- 
 telligent Episcopalians,' on this subject ; at least, if there 
 was any sincerity (as there undoubtiedly was) in the dec- 
 laration of their respectable counsel before the Legisla- 
 ture, that they wished the State could and would do still 
 more than they had ever done for these useful institu- 
 tions. Perhaps this writer thinks these gentlemen were 
 not sufficiently judicious in the management' of their 
 case, and that they ought to have exhibited in terrible 
 array, to (lie Legislature, the learned languages, the 
 tnathematics, philosophy, the- belles-lettres, and«chemis- 
 try, the whole materia medica, and more especially the 
 tools for anatomical dissection, as powerful engines in 
 the hands of Presbyterian Tutors and Professors, for t^e 
 destruction of Episcopacy ; and, after working up their 
 
24 
 
 feelings by this frigtitful picture of blood-thirsty per^- 
 cution and intolerance, to have addressed them on the 
 utter invalidity of Presbyterian ordination, and the enor- 
 mous danger to the State of admitting men to the pas- 
 toral oiEce, who had not been consecrated thereto by 
 some learned Bishop of the Episcopal church. What a 
 strong case this writer has made iot the "Bishop's 
 Fund-," by just touching the public feeling on the sub- 
 ject of toleration ! 
 
 . Does he know that the Episcopal students in Yale 
 College are not obliged to hear the system of theplogy 
 which is preached there from the desk, unless it is the 
 wish of theimselves or their parents that they should ? i 
 Or does he think that there is any thing taught in the 
 catechetical lectures, delivered by the venerable Presi- 
 dent ,to the Senior Class, once a week, from Vincent as 
 a text-book, that any Christian parent, of any sect, would 
 object tQrtheir children's hearing ? Or does he think it 
 practicable or expedient, that there should be in that 
 college a distinct Divinity Professor for every distinct 
 sect,— one for the Presbyterians, another for the Epis- 
 copalians, another for the Baptists, another for the Sev- 
 enth-day Baptists, the Methodists, &c. ? Or would he 
 have a distinct college for every distinct sect ? 
 . But, it seems, there is " a creed' or test of religious 
 faith" prescribed for the officers of this college ; and 
 the writer quotes the old formula from President Clap's 
 History, which he understands is substantially in use at 
 this time, and some of the words of which he unfairly 
 quotes in italics, by way of emphasis, and as if he would 
 wish his readers to understand that it is precisely in use 
 at this time. Does he say that, in point of fact, men of 
 any denomination, and possessed of common liberality, 
 are excluded from office in that college ? Why does he 
 not quote from Dr. Clap the occasion and the reasons of 
 adopting this formula, and tell his readers that it was in- 
 tended to guard against " Arminian and Prelatic princi- 
 ples?"*, as appears, by a vote on the same page, (85,) 
 
 * "J3y Pjelatical principles, (says President. Clap, p, 34,) I un- 
 derstand the principle, that Prelacy or Episcopacy is of Dirms 
 Right in such an exclusi\'e sense as to iKVAUDAfE all Presbvte- 
 
25 
 
 from which he quotes : " It is especially declared, that if any 
 person shall deny the validity of the ordination of the ministers 
 of this colony, commenly called Presbyttrian or Congregational, 
 or shall hold that it is necessary or convenient that such minis- 
 ters should be re-ordained; in order to render their administra- 
 tions valid, it shall be deemed an essential departure from our 
 ecclesiastical constitution, and inconsistent with the intentions 
 of the founders of this college, that such a person should be 
 chosen an officer in it." — Is this to be eoipplained of as too in- 
 tolerant ? Would " Toleration" himself wish to see the Episco- 
 pal officers of that college permitted to teach the jrouth there, 
 that the religion of their fathers was heresy? that the pastors by 
 whom they had been baptized and taught, were usurpers of 
 their sacred office ? that nine tenths of the people of this State 
 are out of the pale of the only true Apostolic Church, and do 
 not enjoy the privileges of a valid administration of the Gospel 
 ordinances ; because, forsooth, these can be lawfully and scrip- 
 turally administered only by men approved and ordained by an 
 Episcopal Bishop ?f Did the Presbyterians hold such intole- 
 rant and illiberal sentiments as these towards their Episcopal 
 brethren, there would then be some ground of complaint; but 
 they do not. They acknowledge the Episcopal to be a Chris- 
 tian church, and one under whose organization true religion has 
 flourished and may flourish ; and only beg to be excused from 
 believing that their Bishops are any more of divine right than 
 our Clergy, or that their system of government is any more war- 
 ranted or enjoined by Scripture than our own. 
 
 The Government of Yale College and the Medical Institution 
 is not confined by its charter and laws to the Presbyterian de- 
 nomination. Episcopalians have been, and still are, whenever 
 superior or equal merit entitles them, admitted to the offices, as 
 well as the other honours of those institutions. Did this writer 
 mean to insult his friends who have been officers in that college, 
 by telling them, as he does, that they could not have been offi- 
 cers there, wi</iOM< " abjuring their faith'?" — Dare he hold this 
 language to the venerable Professor of Materia Medica and Bot- 
 any (an Episcopalian) in the Medical Institution, which in this 
 respect he places on the same ground with the College.'' It is 
 totally impracticable for any literary institution, (and nothing 
 
 j-ian Ordination. But the epinion, that Episcopal Government is only 
 most CONVENIENT, Or may be complied with as a civil establishment, I 
 suppose the Trustees did not esteem to be inconsistent either with Aca- 
 demical or Christian communion." Does this writer tliink Dr. Clap un- 
 derstood toleration.' I wish he had one half of the Doctor's liberality. 
 
 t All Episcopalians do not believe in these harsh tenets ; perhaps very 
 few do ; but that some do, the writer in queslion furnishes a laraeDtabJ« 
 proof. 
 
 D 
 
26 
 
 but bigotry itself would give any other appellation to our col- 
 lege,) to be conducted upon more fair and liberal principles 
 towards all denominations of religion, than Yale College is, and 
 always has been; and he who, with a knowledge of this, can. 
 wage Gothic warfare against that institution, is a foe to the best 
 interests of the State. Enlightened Episcopalians do not make 
 this complaint; they gladly send their sons to that seminary tp 
 be educatcdj and rejoice in it as one of the greatest ornaments 
 of our country. No pne (I believe) ever knew an Episcopal 
 student turned from his faith there; but on the contrary, more 
 of them, perhaps, in proportion to their number, have been edu- 
 cated for the Episcopal ministry, than of any other denomination 
 for any other particular ministry. President Clap tells us, that 
 in his time, out of 400 clergymen who had been nurtured there, 
 40 of them, or one tenth of the whole, were Episcopally ordain-, 
 ed. Can any friend of science, can any liberal man, in view of 
 these facts, think it reasonable.^ that the scanty patronage which 
 the Legislature, by its pecuniary grants, occasionally extends to 
 Yale College, shoiQd be divided up, and apportioned to an Epis- 
 copal College, a Methodist College, and, in short, (for the rea- 
 son is the same in all,) to as many different colleges as there are 
 different sects in the State? Would this be "toleration"'?- or 
 would it be folly and madness i No, this writer cannot have 
 spoken the serious sentiments of his friends : he probably did 
 not comprehend the scope of his own reasoning : foi- he would 
 find himself as unfortunate in his consequences, as I think he 
 has been shown mistaken and incorrect in his premises. Cer-, 
 tainly, it were better for us all, whatever our sect, to join in 
 building up and supporting the noble and liberal University we 
 have, than to undermine it by foolishly scattering its resources 
 among a number of petty colleges, which, from their very foun- 
 idation, (according to the plan of this writer,) must inevitably all 
 be narrow-minded and sectarian institutions. 
 
 When this writer says, that the Medical College favours Pres- 
 byterianism, and that the money granted them by the Legisla- 
 ture is "paid out to the support of Presbyterianism," and insinu- 
 ates, as he does in a note, that the erection of a "Lunatic Hos- 
 pital and State Poor-House" with the remaining 30,000 dollars, 
 would be still further in support of Presbyterianism ; he appears 
 to me to be the willing dupe of a distempered and green-eyed 
 jealousy, Some Episcopalians, unless their intellects and their 
 purses are exempted from the common calamities of man, may 
 have occasion for one of those infilitutions at least ; and as they 
 are all mortal, like the rest of mankind, it is no disparagement 
 to them to say, there are very few of them but sometimes have 
 need of a Doctor. The digestion of the most healthy is not al- 
 ways good ; and the stomach is such a rebellious organ, that a 
 S;entle dose is now and then necessary to keep it in any sort of 
 
27 
 
 order. Let us then cherish this seminary of physicians, so use- 
 ful to all sects, and not trouble ourselves with the visionary no- 
 tion, that while they prepare genuine medicine only for the 
 C ongregationalists, they will administer poisonous and deadly 
 doses to Episcopalians. 
 
 In making these hasty remarks upon the piece signed " Tole- 
 ration," I have not considered the writer as the mouth-piece of 
 his sect, or as speaking the general sentiments of the numerous 
 and respectable members of the Episcopal church. With the 
 great body of them, when the facts of the case are rightly un- 
 derstood, and a due deference is paid to the repeated decisions 
 of the Legislature, I think there can be no dispute. But with 
 those of them, who would make their religion a political engine; 
 who, after all that has taken place, would still degrade it by an 
 indecbrous scramble after the paltry sum of ten thotisand dollars ; 
 who cry Toleration, when they mean the aggrandizement of 
 their sect beyond all others; who would involve Religion (which 
 ought to be held sacred by all) in the party animosities of the 
 day, and throw it into the one scale or the other, as shall best 
 help their Fund; — with such men, every good citizen, who 
 stands up for the peace of the State, and the equal privileges of 
 all, must of necessity have a controversy. Their more sober 
 friends will not consider opposition to these men, as opposition 
 to their religion ; but will listen to a discussion as to the propri- 
 ety of taking moqey from the public treasury to accomplish a 
 particular object, without supposing that those who think the 
 object ought not to be accomplished in this mode, are of course 
 opposed to the object itself, or to its attainment at all events, 
 and in any other more usual or less dangerous mode. 
 
 Were this an application on behalf of the Presbyterians, and 
 made under the same or similar circumstances, I think every 
 hand and every voice in the State ought to be raised against it, 
 and for the same reason, TiMT THE PUBLIC TREASU^ 
 RY NEVER SHOULD BE UNLOCKED FOR THE 
 EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF ANY SECT OF CHRIS- 
 TIANS, HOWEVER NUMEROUS OR RESPECTA- 
 BLE THEY MAY BE. 
 
 HAMILTON. 
 
 No. VL 
 
 To Connecticut Episcopalians. 
 
 YOU will perceive, by the last Herald, that the adversary of 
 Toleration, and of Churchmen, has redeemed his pledge ; and, 
 after a fortnight's fixing, has, in good faith, come back to :he 
 contest, under the name of "Hamilton." 
 
The main object of the gentleman now steems to be, to con- 
 vince you by dint of hard pounding, that Yale College is in 
 truth Episcopal ; or rather, that it savours as much of Episcopa- 
 cy as of Presbyterianism : and from these premises he would 
 argue, that your faithful guardians in the Legislature not only 
 were right in giving the Medical Establishment of the College 
 ^20,000, and at the same time refusing you a dollar ; but that 
 these faithful gaardians ought further to show their sense of jiis- 
 tice, at their next session, by turning the remaming |30,000 into 
 the same college treasury. He admits, however, that there is a 
 creed, which all college officers, from the president down to the 
 butler, must subscribe to, before they can officiate ; but still in- 
 sists that this creed was, originally, only aimed at "Arminian or 
 Prelatic principles," and that there is nothing in it at all at va- 
 riance with the feelings or principles of Episcopalians. Nay, he 
 even accuses " Toleration" of misquoting from President Clap's 
 College History j and very sprightly asks, " Why does he (Tol- 
 eration) not quote from Dr. Clap, the occasion and the reasons 
 of adopting this formula, and tell his readers that it was intend- 
 ed to guard aga'mst Arminian and Prelatic principles.''" (not 
 against Episcopal principles.) This writer certainly never could 
 have driven his pen through this question, unless be had suppo- 
 sed that there was no other copy of Clap's History extant, than 
 the one which is locked up in the archives of the College, and 
 of course inaccessible to Churchmen. Fortunately, however, I 
 happen to have a musty copy of this scarce article by me, and 
 will forthwith proceed both to give you the " occasion" and the 
 " reasons," as related by the doctor himself, for the introduction 
 of this touchstone of faith, or religious creed. Mark, now, how 
 plain a tale shall put this man down. 
 
 Turn to the same history of President Clap, from page 31 to 
 34; and you find that, at a certain period, the then president or 
 rector of the college, Dr. Cutler, and one of his tutors, by their 
 own researches, in opposition to the obstinacy of the times and 
 the prejudices of education, read themselves into the belief that 
 Episcopacy was right, and Presbyterianism wrong — In plain 
 words, they turned Churchmen. " This event (says the author, 
 whom I quote) was somewhat surprising to the trustees, and to 
 the body of the people ; for at that time there was not one Epis- 
 copal minister in the colony of Connecticut, and but very few 
 of the laity. Whereupon the trustees met, and passed the fol- 
 lowing votes : 
 
 "Voted, That the trustees, m faithfulness to the trust reposed 
 in them, do excuse the Rev. Mr. Cutler from all further service 
 
 as rector of Yale College." Having thus courteously slid 
 
 the venerable rector from his seat, without any previous request 
 on his part, the trustees proceed to remedy the mischief for the 
 future, by establishing their t^st creed as follows : 
 
29 
 
 " Fb<e£?,"That all such persons as shall hereafitr be elected to 
 the office of Rector or Tutor in this College, shall, before they 
 are accepted therein, before the Trustees, declare their assent to 
 the Confession of Faith, owned and consented to by the Elders 
 and Messengers of the Churches of the colony of Connecticut, 
 assembled by delegation at Saybroofc, Sept. 9th, 1708, and con- 
 firmed by Act of the General Assemhly ; and shall particularly give 
 satisfaction to them of the soundness of their faith, in; opposi- 
 tion to Arminian and Prelatic corruptions," &c. And, as if they 
 were not sufficiently secure — again : " Voted, That upon just 
 ground of suspicion of the R,ector or Tutor's inclination to Ar- 
 minian or Prdatic principles, a meeting of the Trustees shall be 
 called as soon as may be, to examine into the case." 
 
 Read these votes over again ; yes, treasure them in your 
 hearts, and then say, what think you of the liberality of the Col- 
 lege towards Churchmen .'' Do you think this adversary of 
 "Toleration" will again ask for the reasons and "occasion" of 
 establishing the college creed .'' If so, he shall be treated to a 
 few more choice selections from the same valuable historian. 
 Prelatic and Arminian corruptions ! Our adversary undertakes 
 very kindly to instruct us as to the meaning of those terms. 
 You, I believe, are no strangers to their meaning ; and are quite 
 competent to construe them, without his assistance, or even the 
 
 ftlacid annotations of good President Clap. You, I dare say, 
 lave often heard people talk about "Prelatic corruptions." The 
 expression is no more nor less than the common slang, which 
 even the modern enemies of the church so often fling in your 
 teeth, when they can find nothing else with which to vilify you. 
 ' But further ; we are triumphantly told, that the Professor of 
 Materia Medica, in the Medical Institution, is an Episcopalian. 
 And why did not the writer also tell us, that the former President 
 Cutler was also an Episcopalian ? — and then he would most con- 
 clusively have proved that this institution is not the foundhng of 
 a sect. 
 
 Yes, Episcopalians, I feel a pride and pleasure in acquainting 
 you, that this venerable and learned professor, an ornament to 
 any institution, and any sect, to which the influence of his name 
 may be attached ; has, in the evening of his days, like the ven- 
 erable President Cutler, by his own reflections and researches, 
 overcome the prejudices of education, and, with a magnanimity 
 commensurate with his piety, has enrolled his name among the 
 fathers of the church. Whether the college corporation have 
 yet bad a solemn convocation, and, in " fulfilment of their trust," 
 voted to " excuse" this venerable man from any further exer- 
 cise of his official functions, is more than I can say : but this I 
 mn say, that since he became an Episcopalian, this venerable 
 man has never delivered, or attended, a single lecture in the in- 
 stitution — nay, I believe I may further add, that, since that pe- 
 
30 
 
 fiod, he has never entered within the walls of College. Now, 
 whether this learned professor has left the College, or the Col- 
 lege left him, is a moot point, which it is unnecessary that 1 
 should meddle with. _ 
 
 Again, our antagonist, not content with trying to cheat your 
 understandings, by carving out detached sentences from Doctor 
 Clap's History, takes great pains to tell you, that in England, 
 where Bishops wear their mitred fronts in the House of Lords, 
 the officers of the government are obliged to subscribe to the 
 tenets of the church. And wliat does this prove i Why, if it 
 proves any thing, it is, that the English government has commit- 
 tsd the same fault as most other monarchical governnients : but 
 does it prove any thing against the church, or the " Divine right 
 of Bishops," which this adversary so malignantly sneers at .? 
 And to cap the climax, we are told, that there is no place on 
 earth "where toleration is more universal and more uee, than 
 in the State of Connecticut." True, you are not now tylhed or 
 taxed for the support of the established order. Some of you, 
 however, may be old enough to remember when the Saybrook 
 Platform, by act of the General Assembly, was the touchstone 
 of faith. And many of you can remember when you, yes, you, 
 Churchmen, were taxed for the building of meeting-houses,* 
 and for the support of the Presbyterian clergy. The law abol- 
 ishing the old system of society taxation, was only passed in the 
 year 1784; and the recollection of this old system, doubtless,, 
 will nerve you to resist its return in any shape it may assume — 
 Yes, meet the mischief in its beginning, and "snuff its progress 
 in every tainted gale." 
 
 Thus much for the Episcopacy of England, and the Episco- 
 pacy of the College. 
 
 I cannot, however, close this communication, without spread- 
 ing before you a few more observations on the subjects embra- 
 ced by my last address. You have been so often told that the 
 Council voted against the petition for the Phoenix Bank, on the 
 ground of the clause relating to the Bonus, (when in fact their 
 objections to the petition were levelled solely at the extrava- 
 gant capital prayed for,) that many believe it, because they 
 will not take the trouhle to inquire into the facts. — My 
 last communication informed you, that the Upper House, 
 when they originated the bill for the incorporation of a bank, 
 with one million of dollars, (a capital one third less than was 
 prayed for, though the act in other respects follows the terms of 
 the petition,) tkey immediately afterwards followed the charter, 
 with a proposition to distribute the Bonus according to the pray- 
 er of the petitioners. This, to be sure, did not much look as if 
 
 * Query.— What is the difference be tween taxing Churchmen for the 
 building of meeting-houses, and tailing their money to build Presbyte- : 
 rian Colleges ? 
 
31 
 
 they were opposed to distributing fairly the " detestable bonus,'' 
 as it has since been called. But accompany nae a little further — 
 follow the zigzag course of the Bonus, till you come to the 
 spring session of the Legislature, 1815 ; and you there find that 
 the Upper House, (aye, the same Upper House which we are 
 now told only happens to be of a different opinion,) originated a 
 bill and passed it, by a vote of eleven to two, not only granting 
 ^10,000 to the Bishop's Fund, according to the views of the 
 original bank petitioners ; but, as if to prevent all mistake^ to 
 clear up all doubts as to their ever having been opposed to the 
 Bonus clause of the petition, they expressly buttressed this bill, 
 both on the petition and the charter ; and, by a long explanatory 
 preamble, declared, openly and unequivocally, that they appro- 
 priated the money by virtue of the original bank^efe^ion, as well 
 as the bank charter, which followed the petition. And yet your 
 adversaries tell you, that although the petition for the bank pas- 
 sed the Lower House by a large majority, yet that it was in- 
 stantly rejected in the Council, " on the ground of the excep- 
 tionable clause respecting the appropriation of the Bonus ;" and 
 that the present act, incorporating the Phnsnix Bank, " was pas- 
 sed independent of any petition." Really, when men offer you 
 such arguments, in the face of such facts, it is an insult, tenfold 
 greater to your understandings, than to tell you that Yale Col- 
 lege is in justice entitled to the whole of the Bonus. Do you 
 doubt, whether there was in truth such a preamble to the grant, 
 as the one alluded to,'' Make your appeal, then, to the honour- 
 able Council themselves, or to any honourable member of the 
 Council. 
 
 Taking, then, for truth, (for the present,) the grant, and the 
 preamble above stated, what in the name of wonder were the 
 weighty reasons which influenced their honourable minds, only 
 four months after this solemn declaration, with only ©ne dissent- 
 ing vote, (the Hon. Mr. Johnson,) to say that you ought not to 
 have a dollar of the money.'' No reasons, as I have heard, have 
 yet- been given to the public; though I have no doubt there 
 were reasons for this, to us, seeming inconsistency ; and I am 
 afraid that we shall not be able, easily, to obtain the reasons as- 
 signed by the honourable Council, at the time this last vote was 
 passed, because there is no reporter of the debates ; and the 
 discussions and votes of the Council, you know, are always with 
 closed doors. It is to be hoped, however, if the contemplated 
 grant of the remaining f 30,000 to the Medical Institution, 
 should take effect at the next session, in conformity to the petition 
 which so modestly trod on the heels of your claim ; especially if 
 the bill, making the appropriation, should originate in the Upper 
 House; that their Honours will head the bill by a preamble, 
 similar to the one I have alluded to, explaining the why and the 
 wherefore of .the grant; and if the General Assembly will only 
 
B2 
 
 consign both preambles, the former and the latter, to the archives 
 of the college, along with the money, I will cease to assert 
 any further claim to the Bonus. <• ., ? t. • ii 
 
 But why should we pursue the subject further ? It is meekly 
 luggested by our adversary, ni the last Herald, that we ought 
 now to renounce our claim, and let the College have the money. 
 The sum, we are told, is but a "paltry 10,000 dollars; and you 
 have had your share ; yes, you have had the glitter and the jin- 
 gle ; but the substantials must be appropriated to the grand ob- 
 jects of the University. And as for the Council, it is an honour- 
 able body, made up of honourable men; a sort of. "touch me 
 not." It is wrong, it is a second sort of blasphemy, to examme 
 their acts. Yes, according to this writer, your feelings must be 
 fettered; yourhps locked ; for if you presume to lisp a syllable 
 about the rights of Churchmen, you are branded as a "faction*" 
 and held out to the public as men who have laid their religion on 
 the altars of party. Go then, and learn to forget — yes, forget — 
 and be forgotten yoilrselves. 
 
 A CHURCHMAN. 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 MR. STEELE, 
 
 Sir — We have asserted, that a religious test of faith is requi- 
 red of the officers of Yale College and of the Medical Institu- 
 tion: and we have produced the creed and vote of the college, 
 adopted in 1753, which exclude from oifice those only who be- 
 lieve in the divine right of Bishops ; and we have called for the 
 vote of the college annulling or essentially altering this creed 
 and vote. Did it exist, the writer under the signature of" Ham- 
 ilton" manifests a disposition to give it to the public. He is 
 probably a Professor in the Medical Ihstitution, and was formerly 
 a Tutor in the mother college; and, if so, copies of the creeds 
 for both institutions must be in his possession. 
 
 But, instead of furnishing the public with evidence that these 
 creeds do not exist, he only blames us for not laying before our 
 readers, the "occasion and reasons" assigned for the adoption 
 of this exclusive test of faith : he, in truth, admits and- justifies 
 its existence ; he glories in the exclusion of those who consci- 
 entiously believe in the divine institution of Episcopacy, as ex- 
 plained by President Clap. In what, then, consists our " un- 
 warrantable attack" upon Yale College and its foundling .'' This 
 professor, perhaps, would feel some sensation, if the creed was 
 directed against those who believe, that " by the decree of God, 
 for the manifestation of his gloiy, some men and angels are pre- 
 destinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to ever- 
 lasting death — these angels and men, thus predestinated and 
 
fore-ordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed^ and 
 their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either 
 increased or diminished"* This exclusion extends to another 
 world. 
 
 Suppose we admit, as we believe, that the British govemmetut 
 has in many respects abused Episcopacy ; has not Presbyterian- 
 ism been abused in Scotland, where it has been established ? 
 and in this State, where it was established by law ? What good 
 thing is not liable to abuse f Ought an Episcopalian, then, to 
 be excluded from oMce in a country where " toleration has only 
 been known ; and in Connecticut, where, in no part of the Uni- 
 ted States, it can be found more universal and more _/ree ?"— 
 " Here we all enjoy, says ' Hamilton,' an equality of privileges : 
 no sect is excluded from oflfices : our religious sentiments are 
 left free as air ; and every man is permitted to take his own 
 conscience and the Scriptures as his only rule of faith." 
 
 Allow us, Mr. Steele, to state it to be a fact, that, within 12 
 months, no Physician can be examined for a license, (which li- 
 cense gives the power of legally charging and collecting fees for 
 his services,) without studying at the Medical Institution of Yale 
 College during one course of lectures, or at some other public 
 institution, which other institution must of course be out of the 
 State. And we also declare it to be a fact, that no honorary de- 
 gree in medicine can be conferred, (which honorary degree is 
 always obtainable, when the student has remained two years at 
 the Medical Institution, has procured a license, and has been 
 recommended by the committee,) without the -signature of the 
 President of Yale College : and for proof that we are not incor- 
 rect in this declaration, we refer to the law establishing the Med- 
 ical Institution, passed at the fall session of IS 10. 
 
 The Medical Society, it is feared, U tottering on the verge of 
 ruin. It will soon be considered as a useless and troublesome 
 burden ; and its remaining signs of Hfe will shortly disappear. 
 
 The Students at Law, as well as those of Medicine, will vefy 
 speedily, we believe, be compelled to receive degrees of the same 
 gentleman ! And should our belief be verified by fact, respect- 
 ing the law students, who will then have the hardihood to assert, 
 that the Presbyterians would enjoy all the benefits, without the 
 odium, of a Religious Establishment ? Divinity, Physic, 
 and Law ! — The three learned professions under the guidance 
 of one person and his creed, and that creed the Saybrook Plat- 
 form ! But no establishment. 
 
 TOLERATION. 
 
 * Saybrook Platform, SSd page. 
 E 
 
34 
 
 No. VIII. 
 BISHOP'S BOJVUS. 
 
 IT ought to be held in mind, by all the writers on this sub- 
 ject, that the question at issue can never receive % satisfactory 
 answer from any considerations of a personal nature, or from an 
 appeal to the diflFerent religious tenets of the parties. After 
 these topics are consumed, there will still remain to be decided, 
 the real question about which there can be any rational dispute ; 
 — a question, permit me to add, which equally concerns the Jew 
 and the Gentile, — the Churchman and the Presbyterian. The 
 dispute about the Bishop's Bonus is certainly no way connected 
 with matters of religion. It has nothing to do with toleration, 
 — with the Church of England, — with President Clap's formu- 
 la, — or with the present internal police of Yale College. When 
 the subject is once stript of these adventitious considerations, 
 the writers who have preceded me will be surprised to find how 
 little space the legitimate controversy will occupy. The trans- 
 action to which it refers, does not interfere, in the least degreej 
 with the theological differences between the Presbyterians and 
 Episcopalians, — and would, indeed, remain in exactly the same 
 predicament, were we to substitute, for the real names of the 
 parties^ the unmeaning letters of the alphabet. This device is 
 often resorted to, in conducting the details of fictitious legal 
 contpoviersies ; and I am inclined to think it would have brought 
 the present question to a much speedier termination, had the 
 same expedient been adopted in carrying on its discussion. 
 
 But let us come more immediately to the matter in dispute; 
 As every body knows the transaetion from which the contro- 
 versy has arisen, it will be unnecessary to give a detailed account 
 of it here- All I shall attempt to do in this paper, therefore, 
 will be to weigh the reasoning emplpyed by the abettors of the 
 Legislature, — and to offer one or two considei^atlons in favour of 
 an appropriation to the Bishop's Fund. 
 
 The transaction of the Legislature, relative to the Bonus of 
 the Phoenix Bank, is represented by the vvriters to whom I am 
 opposed, pretty nearly as follows : — An association of individu- 
 als petitioned the General Assembly of Connecticut to incorpo- 
 rate a nev/ banking establishment at Hartford ; offering, as a 
 condition on which they would receive a charter, to appropriate 
 a bonus of ;sJ50,000, partly to the Academical, partly to the 
 Medical Institution of Yale College, and partly to the Fund of 
 the Bishop of Connecticut. Upon these terms, however, the 
 Legislature refused to grant the prayer of the petitioners ; but 
 were willing, at the same time, to give the charter in question, 
 — provided only, that the bonus should be paid into the Treasury 
 of the^ State, unencumbered with any conditions of previous ap- 
 propriation. That this is the state of the case, according to the 
 
35 
 
 writers under consideration, must be quite manifest to every 
 person who attends to the language which they uniformly hold 
 on this subject, and particularly to the last sentence of "Hamil- 
 ton," [page 27,] which, as it was a fundamental position that he 
 wished not to be misunderstood, he has caused to be distin- 
 guished in conspicuous capitals. " The Public Treasuby (says 
 ne) should never be unlocked for the exclusive benefit of any sect 
 of Christians, however respectable or numerous they may be." 
 Thus, then, the transaction was a simple contract between the 
 petitioners for the Bank, and the legislators of the State ; a con- 
 tract which might, according to this view of the case, have been 
 cast into a shape somewhat like the following: — "For, and in 
 consideration of the sum of 50,000 dollars, We, the people of 
 the commonwealth of Connecticut, do promise and engage to 
 grant and give to our petitioners, A, B, C, &c. a charter to a 
 banking institution, to be entitled the Phoenix Bank." The con- 
 tract was a fair one ; but the petitioners got the bargain. There 
 is many a knot of wealthy individuals in this State, who would 
 be willing to buy a bank at a much dearer rate ; and our legis- 
 lators might, after taking this step, convert the Legislative Hall 
 into an Auction Room. 
 
 But, if this representation be correct, the transaction is liable 
 to an imputation still more disparaging than that of a mere 
 matter of bargain and sale. How far, thmk you, is such a pro- 
 cedure from a case of " open and apparent" bribery .'' What 
 other name is there in the English language, which can be ap- 
 plied to a transaction of this nature, entered into by pSirties cir- 
 cumstanced as they are in this proceeding .'' I hardly dare trust 
 myself in drawing out this conclusion to the full length and 
 breadth that is warranted by the premises : but I must go so far 
 as to say, "that, if these writers be correct, the Legislature of 
 this State have been engaged in a business which approaches 
 very near /to palpable corruption. I will not say, they have fall- 
 en down the precipice ; but I do believe they have trodden on 
 its brink. And are we to conclude, that the legislators of Con- 
 necticut, (renowned as they are, all over the Union, for inflexi- 
 ble integrity, and, a steady attachment to just principles,) have 
 been engaged in a proceeding which bears upon its face almost 
 every feature of bribery,^ — the very highest crime (next to trea- 
 son) in the scale of legislative transgression ? " Tell it not in 
 Gath !" They never were accessory to such a sin as this ; and 
 the writers who have shown them in this hght, have strangely 
 mistaken the real nature of the transaction. 
 
 That our legislators never considered the Bonus in question 
 as a payment mto the treasury of the State, is clear from the 
 fact, that, as soon as the money was received, they proceeded to 
 make appropriations almost precisely similar to those which had 
 been suggested by the petitioners for the Bank. 20,000 dollars 
 
36 
 
 were diyided between the Academical arid M-edical Depart- 
 ments of Yale College, Now, the writers who maintain that 
 the Bonus wa« actually a payment into our treasury^ must, to 
 save their consistency, represent this distribution of |20,0Wjf 
 not as an appropriation of that Bonus, but as a donation from/ 
 the State to the College in our city. In short, according to, 
 " Hamilton" & Co., the Bonus was swallowed up by the treasu-i 
 ry, and can no longer be subject to a distribution under the name 
 oi appropriation. Now,'my fellow-citizens, look steadily at this 
 representation for one moment. If the |2Q,000 given to Yale 
 College Was not considered as an appropriation of a part of the 
 Bonus, how came it to pass that our legislators, who had here-, 
 tofore given nothing of consequence to this literary institution, 
 should ail at once relax their gripe upon the public funds, and 
 become so liberal as to make a donation to the two parts of the 
 seminary, of no less than two-fifths of the Bonus .'' Why, above 
 all, should they have chosen to make this generous donation at 
 a time wheji every sinew of the State, and «very penny of the 
 treasury, was in requisition for the defence of our maritime fron- 
 tier .'' Would any man in his senses, when the storm was ready 
 to break over his head, be spending his time and his money ta 
 procure a philosophical apparatus, und books upon electricity, 
 while he ought to be erecting a thunder-pole ? What one man 
 would not do in bis senses, let it not be pretended would be 
 done by 230 grave legislators. 
 
 What adds great weight to this reasoning, is, that apparentlyj 
 the only excuse which could be given for a refiisal to make the 
 appropriation to the Bishop's Fimd, was, that the money was 
 absolutely required for the defence of the State ; — an excuse 
 which carried in its very heart a promise to make the appropric 
 ation in qtiestion as soon as the tempest had gone by. It was 
 taken for granted, in short, both vyithin, and without, the walls 
 of the State-House, that the bonus of the petitioners for thie 
 Bank was not a payment into the treasury of Connecticut, but a 
 donation, from the Phcenix Bank to the several institutions to 
 which it had been appropriated. 
 
 But let us carry our investigation a little further, and see 
 whether the i-efusal of the Legislature to grant the Bishop's bo- 
 nus can be reconciled to the rule which mutually governs all 
 parties in every sort of promise and contract. Tljis is, accord- 
 ing to Paley, that " Whatever is expected by one side, and known 
 to be expected by the other, is to be deemed a part or condition of 
 the contract." Now, in order to discover what was in this case 
 expected by the petitioners, and known to be so expected by 
 the legislators, let us recur to the conduct of the parties at th€ 
 time when this contract or promise took place. What then, let 
 me ask, was the reason for refusing to grant the charter to the 
 Phoenix Bank upon the terms originally contained in the peti- 
 
37 
 
 tion? Were there any specific objections to the appropriation 
 urged as a reason for that refusal ? Was there, in short, a single 
 complaint in the mouth of any one against the distribution of 
 the bonus, as it had been made by the petitioners ? On the con- 
 trary, was there not a manifest disposition to favour the appro- 
 priation to the Bishop's Fund, through all the branches of the 
 Legislature ? Did not this disposition, in the first stages of the 
 business, seem to form a kind of runmng accompaniment to all 
 the deliberations of both Houses of Assembly ? — What, then, it 
 may be further asked, was (he reason that the Legislature re- 
 jected the petition in its original shape? Solely, I answer, be- 
 cause there seemed to be a kind of impropriety in suffering a 
 set of individuals, under no authoritative association, to dispose 
 of a sum of money which they had promised to give to the sup- 
 port of public institutions, as an equivalent for a charter of a 
 banking establishment. It seemed to be a kind of usurpation of 
 the; legislative prerogative ; — and though there was no objection 
 to the appropriation as it stood in the original petition, yet it 
 ought to be made in the name of the State government. This 
 then was apparently the understanding of the two parties, — or," 
 at all events^ it was so understood by the Legislature ; for I can 
 see no other rational excuse for the refusal of the first petition; 
 since, as I said before, they did not, in their first deliberations 
 on this subject, oppose any objections to the Bonus of the 
 Bishop. 
 
 In order to cJea'r.this question of all room for religious dispute, 
 and to exhibit it in its simple, unsophisticated form, let us sup- 
 pose for a moment that we live under an absolute monarchy. 
 A comes to his sovereign B, with a petition for a charter to a 
 bank, — promising, as a condition to the grant, that he will dis- 
 tribute a bonus of 50,000 dollars among the three institutions, 
 C, D, E. "No," says B, "it would not do for me to grant your 
 petition in this form. The distribution of the bonus you offer, 
 is not properly committed to the hands of a private individual ; 
 and although I have now no objection to the appropriation as 
 you have made it, yet that appropriation ought to be under the 
 name of the government. And, betwix't you and I, this is ex- 
 actly the appropriation which I shall make, if you alter your pe- 
 tition so as to tbrowtbat part of the business on my shoulders." 
 " O well," says A, " it makes no difference to me, in whose name 
 the appropriation -is made ; and T am perfectly willing to take 
 the charter on the conditions which your Majesty has suggested. 
 But if I thought the distribution would be altered after tJie mo- 
 ney has been consigned to your Majesty's hands" ■■ — " Give 
 
 yourself no uneasiness about that. The appropriation, as you 
 have made it, is not, so far as I can see, liable to any valid ob- 
 jection." Now suppose that his Majesty, after this mutual agree- 
 ment, had proceeded to make the appropriations to C and D, 
 
38 
 
 but absolutely refused to give a penny to E,— let me ask "Hmi.. 
 iltoii " if he had been the petitioner, in what kind of langU^e 
 he would have addressed the throne? Would he not have ex- 
 postulated with his Majesty, in something like the following 
 
 manner? . . ,, j. ^ <• 
 
 " When I had the honour to lay. a petition at the leet oi your 
 Royal Highness, praying for a charter to a banking institution, 
 your Royal Highness will recollect that it was expected by me, 
 and, as I humbly conceive, known to be so expected by your 
 Royal Highness, that the appropriations of the bonus which I 
 had the honour to offer, were to be made according to the plan 
 which was laid out in the original petition: But whereas, it has 
 pleased your Majesty to alter and modify the appropriation of 
 your humble petitioner, so as to deprive E altoge;ther of that 
 part which yourpeJl^ner had originally assigned to it, — your 
 petitioner would th"i^^»e humbly pray that his Majesty would 
 be graciously pleased to "distribute the bonus according to the' 
 original understanding of his Royal Highness and his humble 
 petitioner," &c. 
 
 There is one question relative to this subject, which I wish 
 Blight be answered by " Hamilton" or his associates. Suppose 
 the Ijegislature, ^fter getting the .^S0,000 in its possession, had 
 Mpropriated the greater part of it to erect (for instance) a new 
 Fort at the mouth of our harbour, — leaving Yale College, in 
 vulgar parlance, fo take care of itself, as they have uniformly done 
 heretofore; would a single honest mouth hAve been shut? 
 Would not such a proceeding have revolutionized our Legisla- 
 ture ? How many members, think you, would have retained 
 their seats? — There is no room here {or &ny religious considera- 
 tions. A part of the Bonus of the Phoenix Bank was given, by 
 the petitioners, to the Fund of the Bishop of this State. To 
 bim, therefore, the Legislature was as much bound to appropri- 
 ate 10,000 of the S0,000 dollars, as they were to distribute the 
 20,000 to the Academical and Medical Institutions of Yale 
 College. 
 
 I wish it to be distinctly understood, that I am decidedly op- 
 posed to any scheme by which the public funds of the State 
 shailt be turned to the exclusive advantage of any religious sect. 
 No rational man would think of abetting such a scheme ; and 
 perhaps no man but "Hamilton" himself would have supposed 
 that the Episcopalians, in petitioning for their Bonus, were act- 
 ing in conformity with such a system. All they want, is, that a 
 donation from any set of individuals, to any institution whatever, 
 should not be locked up in the public treasury of the State, be- 
 cause formality required that it should be made in the name of 
 the Good People of Connecticut. 
 
 LOKMAN. 
 
S9 
 
 No. IX. 
 To Conneclicut Episcopalians. 
 
 ALTHOUGH no Episcopalian myself, I have too much re- 
 spect for you, to suppose that it is at all necessary, on that ac- 
 count, to crave your indulgence, or make any mawkish apologies 
 for addressing you. The same liberty of speech, which yoa 
 would approbate in an Episcopalian, you. have too much good 
 sense to deem improper and offensive in a Presbyterian ; and it 
 is not the name which a writer assumes, nor the sect to whicb 
 he belongs, which will determine your judgment as to the force 
 of his reasoning, or the justness of his sentiments. Whoever 
 addresses himself to your feelings, and not to your understand- 
 ings, and would stun your ears with declamation for lack of ar- 
 gument, let him belong to what sect he will, forfeits all right t» 
 your confidence, and cannot put in that claim to your attention, 
 which he may boldly urge, who submits to you facts that are in- 
 disputable, and offers to you such reasons only as he thinks are 
 incontrovertible. 
 
 In a free country, openly professing a religion which you rer- 
 erence beyond all others ; enjoying a toleration unknown to the 
 founders of the English church ; with no one who has even a 
 disposition, much less the power, to molest you in your civil or 
 religious privileges ; where (to use a hackneyed metaphor) the 
 doors of public confidence are thrown wide open for your ad- 
 mission ; an unhallowed attempt is making to impress you with 
 t-he belief, that you are the objects of jealousy to your fellowr 
 Christians, and the victims of a most unjust and relentless perse- 
 cution. Be not surprised, and wrong me not by supposing 1 
 mean any imputation upon you, when I tell you that the authors 
 of this attempt are within your own bosom. No church on 
 earth is pure — every one is infested with its own bigots and 
 zealots, who think theirs is the only road to heaven, and that all 
 who are without the pale of their communion, are aliens and 
 outcasts from the true religion, and assiduously seeking its de- 
 struction. There have been found men among the Dissenters 
 from the Church of England, who, in the fervour of rehgious 
 controversy, could contend that the government of the church 
 by bishops must be ecclesiastical tyranny ; and a written liturgy, 
 however excellent, no better than a solemn and lifeless mock- 
 ery. There have also, been found men in that Church, who^ ar- 
 rogated to themselves distinction ; who eould contend, that ev- 
 ery ecclesiastical office among the Dissenters was an usurpation, 
 because not conferred by the authority of a bishop ; that dis- 
 senting meeting-houses were unsanctified places, because not 
 consecrated by an Episcopal bishop ; and that all extemporane- 
 ous prayer, though breathed from the very soul of piety, was 
 
40 
 
 sacrilegious and profane. If there be an^ such fanatics as these 
 
 amongst us, who think that . true religion is confined exclusively 
 
 to their own sect, and cannot exist except under their own rites 
 
 and forms of worship ; we have to lament that the clouds, which 
 
 for so many ages overhung the Church, are not yiet compleitely 
 
 dispersed by the glorious sun of the Reformation, and that some 
 
 men are to be found, even in this age and country, who love 
 
 darkness rather than light. But let not these men attempt to 
 
 extend the empire of darkness beyond their own minds : let 
 
 them brood over the phantasms of their own disordered vision; 
 
 but never Jet them attempt to poison and embitter the minds of 
 
 jtwo great bodies of Christian& with jealousies and animosities 
 
 towards each other, and disturb that religious peace and harmo- 
 
 ■ny, which, has so happily existed among us since our Revolution. 
 
 If we exercise Christian charity towards each other, we shall 
 
 continue to dwell togethe.r as brethren ; but if we distort and 
 
 misrepresent each other's professions and conduct, there is as 
 
 *nd of all religious intercourse between us, and our bond of 
 
 union is severed for ever. 
 
 You will not believe that the Presbyterians act without mo- 
 tive, and without regard to their owninterest : and I would ask 
 you, what possible motive or interest they can have, in exerci- 
 sing any intolerance towards the Episcopalians .'' Surely all his- 
 tory tells us, that they have been too much the objects of perse- 
 cution themselves, (I need not tell you by whom,) not to have 
 discovered that persecution is the most direct way to build up 
 its object, and is, in reality, the most effectual patronage. They 
 certainly know, that your religion, in all its most grand and es- 
 sential doctrines, is the same as theirs ; and that, with regard to 
 forms of government and modes of worship, if yours cannot re- 
 tain a majority in England, where it is supported by the whole 
 strength of a mon9.rchical government, it probably never will ac- 
 quire a majority here, among republicaiis, whose first principle 
 it js, on this subject, that no religion is to be imposed upon us 
 by government, or to draw to its aid the revenue of the State. 
 No ! Presbyterians are not jealous of you, and feel no interest 
 in oppressing you. They have seen issuing from your churchy 
 in Great-Britain, Martyrs in Religion, Giants in Learning, Apos- 
 tles in Piety, and Heroes in Christian Courage, mingling in the 
 great and terrible conflict with Antichrist and his followers, and 
 boldly encountering the embattled hosts of Infidelity and lllu- 
 minism, until the banner of the Cross waved in triumph over 
 their prostrate foes. And think you they do not feel grateful 
 for all this, and that they are unwilling to pay a due reverence 
 to a church that has done so much in the cause of their Saviour? ' 
 JIave not the Presbyterians, as well as i^any other sects, all 
 fought manfully in the same cause ? Have we not all substan- 
 tially the same faith .? Have we not one Bible,— one 4-tone- 
 
41 
 
 naeHt, — one Saviour? And do we not loops for one and tJie same 
 heavm ? 
 
 Is it not then to . b6 regretted, that there are some amongst 
 you, who are setting up the causeless cry of Persecution, and 
 endeavouring to persuade you that the government of the State 
 are trampling on. your rights, and feel hostile to your interests ? 
 — who tell you, that all the Lit«rrary Institutions in th6 State are 
 favouring Presbyterianism ; and that even the cODtein|dated 
 Hospital and Aliits-Uouse for the reception of lunatics and pau- 
 pers, will be ■ * still further in support of Presbyt^rianism," be- 
 cjiuse* (and this is the best evidence they have yet offered you) 
 the site for these buildings has beeii chosen on the land of a 
 Presbyterian gentleman, who is the treasurer of Yale College ? 
 As well might they exclaim against thfe establishment of a: Cot- 
 ton Factory or a Bank, as institutions favourable to Presbyteri- 
 anism, because these are found In many instances to be owned 
 by, and under the direction of, Presbyterian stockholders and 
 officers. Who can read the eflFusions^f these men, and not ex- 
 claim, " O judgflient ! thou hast fled tO' brutish beaists, and men 
 have lost their reason !" When you see the absurdities of such 
 writers exposed, the whole scope of their feeble reasonings laid 
 open, their misrepresentations and fals^ colourings detected, 
 their slanderous attacks and unjust insinuations scornfully repel- 
 led, themselves writhing under the severity of just criticisni, or 
 smarting under the lash of wellrdeserved rMicule; be not 
 alarmed for your religion — your ark does not rest on such fee- 
 ble shoulders — you have never committed your altar to such de- 
 fenders. 
 
 Confident I am, that these men, blown up with a mistaken 
 idea of their own importance and abilities, are mere volunteers, 
 and come, uncalled for, uncommissioned, into the field, With 
 weapons which it is impossible they should have ever drawn 
 from the arsenal of the £piscopal Church. Scurrility is not a 
 very Christian weapon, nor a persuasivie land of argument ; and 
 mistatements, though they may for a while mislem those who 
 have little knowledge and less reflection, will inevitably, in the 
 end, involve their authors in confusion and defeat. When so- 
 lemnly appealed to by these writers, can you say in your con*- 
 sciences, that you feel the pressure of persecution, or that you 
 
 •Because Yale' College fins furnished the Medical Institution with htr 
 cr«ed, and because her ofScers expect to be rewarded with salaries in 
 these establishments. As to the site for these buildings, and that of the' 
 Mother College, we have heard rumour», that the Treasurer (who said in 
 city meeting, when Temple-street was to be straitened, that he had been 
 as public spirited in behalf of our City, as any man in it] contemplates in- 
 jantijg his lands, by getting the colleges pulled down or sold, and rdfuilt 
 ,on his Avenue. This is contemplated by the Treasurer of Yale College, 
 without regard to private interest. — Pubiisheb, 
 
42 
 
 hdievethe Legislature of -Connectieut would designedly injure 
 a, hair of your beads, or rob you of a fartbing of your rights? 
 Does not this Legislature emanate, every few months, from the 
 people, and owe their existence merely to the breath of an en- 
 lightened people, to whom they are responsible for their every 
 act } and can you be made to believe, by the intemperate dec- 
 lamation of anonymous scrihblers, that, thus situated, they would 
 ^t upon sectarian piinciples, and refuse you the pitiful sum ask- 
 e:d for, provided the claim rested upon any solid foundation ? 
 
 I am not a believer in legislative infalhbilityi On the contra- 
 fy, I know, as in the case of the Phcenix- Bonus for instance, 
 ihey are often wheedled and hurried into measures which their 
 more sober judgments would condemn: but I do not yet be- 
 lieve that a Coimecticut Legislature was ever knowingly and 
 wilfully guilfy of corruption* or oppression. Nor will you very - 
 read^y /believe this, pn the yague surmises and garbled statements 
 of prejudiced men, whom youido not know, especially when 
 you remember that the Legislature have acted with a full know- 
 ledge of all the facts respecting the application for the Plwenix 
 charter, and the manner in which that charter .passed, and with, 
 a full view of all the records and votes on the. subject ; and that, 
 thus acting, they have deliberately and repeatedly, and with ma;' > 
 jorities every tinie approaching nearer and nearer to unanimity, 
 decided that the elaim of the Trustees of the Bishop's 
 Fund is not made oiit against the State. Knowing these faot», 
 as they do, suppose they were to grant the application, what ac- 
 count of their conduct could they give to their eonstitjjents, on 
 their return home ? Suppose they were asked. Why have you 
 selected the Episcopal Bishop as an «ibject of legislative boun- 
 ty,f when you have never gmnted:any thing from the treasury 
 for the support of the ministry of any pther sect .'' Think you 
 their consciences would be satisfied with giving such an answer, 
 or that the good people of this State would be satisfied wiUi 
 such an answer, as might be soughtj.or culled out, from the 
 writings whiohhave appeared under the signatures of " Tolera- 
 tion" and " A iGhurchman ?" Even you, yourselves, if you 
 have faithfully investigated the facts in dispute between us, 
 would not, I think, deeip suchan answer very satisfactory, or 
 
 * See the word " morality," on the first line of the 5th page ; and the 
 words "dctestabje bonus". in the fourth line of the same page.— Pub. 
 
 t Episcopalians aak of the Assembly to ajrpropriait a fifth part of the 
 Phcenix premium to the Bishop's fund ; two fifths of the samePhcenix pre- 
 piiuro.being already appropriated (not^aJJterf) "out of the first monies 
 which shall 'be paid into thts Treasury of this State in pursuance of the 
 act incorporating the Phcenix Bank.", See 6th page. They ask not for 
 B grant as a bounty, but for two fifths of an unappropriated sum of money 
 -^one third of which was ofered to the Bishop's fund by the petitioners of * 
 J.tijE Ph^nix Bank.— Pdb. 
 
43 
 
 very creditable to the man who would giVe if as the reason fof 
 his vote. Look at the facts yoarselves, as det^iied in my first 
 number, none of which have yet been Contradicted : and only 
 read the statute incdrporatingtbe Phoenix Bank j and I am sure 
 you will require somethiag more than has yet been produced^ 
 to shake your confidence in your Lei^slature. You Will be sat- 
 isfied, that the real grotfnd of all this clamour against the Legis- 
 lature, is, that instead of accepting the Bonus on terms that 
 were meant as a bribe to the members, they, like good and 
 trusty servants of the public, preferred to turrt it into- treasury 
 " for the benefit of the State." Some of your number, who 
 have been members of the Legislature, have given the sanc- 
 tion of their votes to this disposition of the bonus, and their 
 negative to the application for the Bishop^s Fund ; and others, 
 who were in the gallaries, listening to the debates, have ac- 
 knowledged that justice has been done to the Church. 
 
 J have always thought that Episcopacy, from its very constitu- 
 tion, was friendly to good government, and opposed to faction 
 of every kind : and never expected to see any of its professed 
 advocates clamorously appealii^ from the Legislature to the Peo- 
 ple, from the " powers that be" to the many-headed multitude. 
 It has also been the boast of this relfgiori, in England at least, 
 that it was friendly to learning : but now We see some of its pro- 
 fessors, unauthorized as we hope, attacking, and vilifying the 
 Legislature for having done ' their duty ; and then, with hostiler 
 kepi invading the peaceful fntfeTests of learning. With respect 
 to the coneg;es, however, they argue in the face of (inive'rsal ex- 
 perience^ and in the teeth of facta which are known to every 
 one, and which ought for ever to silence their complaints, and 
 make them blush at their own impotence. 
 
 EpiBCopalisins of Connecticut 1 Scrutinize,* as elosely as you: 
 
 * Here th« EtKtor ef tfje flerald' sappressed some remarks on the 
 ,)acobinica\ tendencyf of the pieces on bnhalf of the Fund, and the im-> 
 propriety of printing them in a Federal Newspaper. In Hamilton's first 
 number, (je pnbjished also, " unwarrantaWs" for " jaeobimeal" attack on 
 Yale College. This be.had a right to do. 
 
 < Compiler (^ liamillorVs- pamphlet, page 42. 
 
 f Jacobinical tendency, fndeed ? What was the tendency of seven 
 pieces which appeared in the Herald soon after the " detestable bonus" 
 was accepted by the* /Assembly, attacking the PhoenixCommissioners by 
 name, and tlie Legislature ? And, of two pieces, which ted the way in 
 the Journal, comparing our Assembly to that of Georgia, in the Yaioo' 
 affair ? This was not "' appealing from the powers that be ! ! !" Oh, no. 
 An Episcopalian was one pf the Commissioners. Then, (his was a?i<t- 
 jacohviiial. Two of the petitioners were also Episcopalians. Then, this 
 ivas "fi'iendly tngood governniont." "Phoenix Bank, the child of Intrigue 
 and mother of Discord !" See the second paragraph of the 12th page- ^ 
 
 If we should substitute Eagle Bank instead of Phtcnix Bank ; if we 
 should s.iy <h:it the Troastirpr of VaVe College and- the President of th*. 
 
44 
 
 plea^pj the conducf of yoUr Legislature ; afid if on suitable e»- 
 ambfttiOB, you find they have done wrong, arraign them, if 
 you please, at the bar of the public, where they will not shrink 
 from an inquiry into their conduct : but let this be done with 
 Recency and candour, not with foul-mouthed scurrility and in- 
 sidious detraction. Let the impeaichment be committed to men 
 who have talents enough to understand the evidence, and make 
 at least a connected, intelligible statement of the^ facts-, and 
 ivho will not abandon the question to indulge in personal ran- 
 cour, or content themselves with re-asserting, every week, argu- 
 ments and psopositicais which have been triumphantly refuted 
 the week before. Such men only injure the cause they es- 
 pouse ; and, not understanding when an issue is closed, they 
 continue to Tyrite on in the dark, and fight as one who beateth 
 the air, till their friends are ashatried any longer to acknowledge 
 them, and they stand aelf-exposed and condemned before the 
 public. 
 
 Eagtc Bank with half the Capital StoClt, took Ao^ the number, or 91 
 Shares to themselvegr; if we should say that the oflicers of Yale Col- 
 lege were taken good care of in the distribution by the Treasurer ;' if 
 w^ should sa^ th^t the families- o( both gentlemen were not without am- 
 ple provision ; if we should say, tliiit a Merchant ought to be president 
 of the Eagle Bank ; if we should say, that the State ought to support 
 their, Judges, without compelling them to mingle in mercantile con- 
 cerns ; if we should' say, that since the appointment of directors, that 
 Ihe Eagle and Fhosnix Bankhqve t>ee^ conducted upon honourable prin- 
 ciples, and, done tnuch good to the agricultural and mercaolile interests i 
 Yes, if we should assert any of these to be facts, a nomination to office 
 by the Judge would be'our reward ! ! 
 
 The President of the Eagle Bank witi reecoUect his nomination for 
 CounQilloT of the author ,of the said seven pieces, who abused the Der- 
 by and almost all the Banks in the State, and who said that should he 
 die in a foreigtr land and be hurried in the same monument with a Prince, 
 he desired no other epitaph for his services rendered in composing these 
 pieces, than that of a " Freeman of Connecticut." AYhat honours will 
 be bestov^red upon Hamilton for his attack, noli Jacohinical, upon Episco- 
 pacy'and the Legislature, for taking the Bonus, by the Judge of the Su- 
 perior Court, aire as yet in embryo. 
 
 Hamilton has introduced the subject of the detestable bonus ; it may 
 seem hardy at this late hour to appear in behalf of the Legislature in es- 
 tablishing a )>recedent in levying a tax upon the grant of Bank charters for 
 the benefitof public Institutions ; which was dotie by them when they 
 incorporated the Phceoix Bjink. 
 
 Pennsylvania has two millions of Bankmg capital which was obtained 
 for the grant of Bank charters : New- York has been able in this mode to 
 relieve the people in a great degree from every other kind of taxation ; 
 and Massachusetts receives angu^lly 1,200,000 dollars, from Vae first grant ■ 
 ing, the renewal, and from an annual tax upon Banks. They are moni- 
 ed institutions, and can moie readily pay taxes than faimers and mechan- 
 ics. Banks have been considered as fair objects of taxation for the 
 support of government, we beneve, in all the other States in the Union. 
 And what good reason can be produced to satisfy the mind thatprtDiJ^- 
 ed bodies of men ought npt tp be taxed, when, they are invested with 
 privileges ? — Pub. 
 
45 
 
 In my preceding numbers, I have attempted to lay the arga- 
 ment respecting the apprapriatton of the Phoeni* Bonus fairly 
 before you and the public : and until the writers who pretend 
 to attack that argunient, can dress themselves into some sort of 
 decency, or some other writer, with more judgment and ability, 
 shall take 'up the subject in opposition to me, I think I faiay 
 cheerfully submit the question, with these remaiiES, to your 
 candid decision. 
 
 HAMILTON. 
 
 No.X. 
 
 Mr., Steele, ' 
 
 A VERY angry and virulent attack on Yale College has been 
 made in several late numbers of the Herald, on account of the 
 test imposed upon the officers of that seminary, at their inaugur- 
 ation. Controversy is, perhaps, alwaysto be dreaded as un- 
 favourable to truth : yet, when subjects of general interest are 
 greatly misrepresented, and wrong impressions are studiously 
 attefnpted to be made on the 'pubuc mind, even controversey 
 should be hazarded as a less evil than might result from the 
 unrestrained prevalence of falsehood, 
 
 Wliat, then, is the charge so furiously urged against our 
 College f or, what is there in its constitution and practice^ 
 which ca^ subject it to the hpavy imputation of intolerance f 
 According to one communication, signed ' Toleration,' every 
 instructor, on his induction into office in that institution, declares 
 his belief, that the Westminster Catechism^ and the Sayhreok 
 Confession of Faith, arp just summarieg of Christian doctrines } 
 and likewise declares bis assent to the mode of church govern- 
 ment adopted by the Congregational churches in this State.-^ 
 This test, it is asserted, operates to exclude Episcopalians fronr 
 all collegiate . offices ; as no one of that denomination can 
 make these declarations, without " abjuring" his faith. 
 
 This, as I understand it, is the objection in its full extent. 
 As such it shall be considered. My object will be to show, 
 that if an evil exists, it is of far less magnitude than has been 
 represented. The Saybrook Confession of Faith will- not, I 
 suppose, be denied to be, in every material point, the same a» 
 that of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster ; and the Wes- 
 minster Catechism is a mere abstract of the Westminster Con- 
 fession. To avoid circumlocutioB, therefore, these will all be 
 considered as one. What, then, is there in the Westminster 
 Confession of Faith, which is so opposed to the general doc- 
 trines of the Protestant churches, that it can form no union with 
 the doctrinal articles of the Church of England .'' — What is 
 there, in an assent to the former, which amounts to an abjura- 
 
16 
 
 tioii of the latter f — Tiiis seiUiment is certainly opposed to tbe 
 general language of the Protestant world : it js^ opposed to the 
 direct declarations of dimes the most distinguished for, their 
 learning and their piety in the Church of England ilpelf. Let 
 the appeal be to facts. " Blessed be God," says Bishop Hall, 
 Ihan whom there is no man of whom the Church of England 
 may be more justly proud, " there is no difference, in any^ fs-^ 
 sential ^owi,- between the Church of England and her sistej; 
 Reformed Churches.'' " We unite in every article of Christian 
 doctrine, without the least variation, as the full and absolute a- 
 greement between their public confessions and ours testifies." 
 What says Bishop Horsely .?— " I know not what hinders," says 
 he, " but that the highest supralapsarian Calvinist may be as 
 good a Churchman as an Arminian." — Surely Bishop Horsley 
 did not suppose, that an assent to the Westminster Confessio^I 
 was "abjuring" the thirty-nine articles. ' ;^ 
 
 But there is no necessity of quoting the declaisations of indi- 
 Tiduals, which might be produced to almost any extent. Look 
 at the head of the Episcopal Church in England. In an, act 
 respecting the Church of Scotland, in the reign of William and 
 Mary, it is said : " Our sovereign lord and lady," &c. &;c. "con- 
 ceive it to be their bounden duty to settle and secure therein 
 (Scotland) the true Protestant Religion, according to the truth 
 of God's word, as it hath for a long time been professed within 
 this land ; and also the gCKernmeiit of Christ's Church (Presby- , 
 terianism) within this nation, agreeable to the word of God, and . 
 most conducive to the advancement of true piety and Godliness," 
 Sfc. fyc. And afterwards, " They (the king and queen) ratify 
 and establish the ,Co?i/e«iion of .FajiA (the Westminster Con- 
 fession) now read in their presence, containing the sum and 
 substance of the doctrine of the Reformed Churchis," fyc. ^c. 
 By an act of the British parliament, (5th of Anne) commonly 
 called the Act of Union, the above act i^ distinctly recognizad 
 and confirmed ; and every sovereign since, on ascending the 
 throne, has taken an oath " inviolably to maintain and preserve 
 the settlement of the true Pr&test&nt Religion,'* ^c. according 
 to these acts. How, then, could " Toleration," with these facts 
 staring him in tbe face, summon imjjudence sufficient, publicly 
 to complain, and, as he would undoubtedly ' be thought, from 
 pure zeal for the Church of England, that the Westminster Con- 
 fession is made a test in Yale College f And more than this, how 
 could this champion of the ikirty-nine articles, find in it his heart 
 to insult the mother Church with the implied declaration, that 
 these very articles are " abjured" by;her head ? There are, how- 
 ever, in every religious community, certain' meddling and offi- 
 cious characters, pretending to superior illumination ; but who 
 discover very fully, by their whims and their vagaries, that their 
 zeal has out-run their knowledge. 
 
47 
 
 Biit, assent is likewvise required to the mode of chiircli sot- 
 ernment' adopted by the Congregationalists in tjiis State. This 
 rule, as appears from another communication, according to 
 President Clap, was introduced to exclude those who believe 
 that " Episcopacy is of divine right in such an exclusive sense 
 SiS to ihvaiiddte all Presbyterian ordinations ;" but not'those who 
 belieye that " Episcopal govemriient is only most convenient, or" 
 may be complied with as a cm7 establishment." 
 - Is it true, thenj that Episcopalians of the United States are 
 of the former class ? That there is one Episcopalian, who be- 
 lieves, if he may give credit to "Toleration," that all, out of 
 the pale of his own sect, are aliens and Outcasts from the 
 church, is a lamentable fact. But that an immense majority 
 of that conimimion wholly reject such extravagancies ; and, es- 
 pecially, that many of the ablest divines, who, by their writings 
 and lives, have been the glory of the English Church, and of 
 our common Christianity, have been of the latter class, is ca-' 
 pable of the most satisfactory proof. 
 
 Here it would be very easy to qupte the opinions and decla- 
 ratiotjs of many 'of the highest dignitaries of the Episcopal 
 Church, which are ejtpress to this point. The venerable names ' 
 of Jewel, of Hall,, of Usher, of Burnet, of Tiljotson, and of ma- 
 ny others, are at hand ; men, who, while they maintained the su- 
 periority of the Episcopal forfti of cliurch government as most 
 expedient, especially where already established, as in Enrfand ; 
 gave no cotmtenance to the doctrine of exdnsive scriptutat war- 
 rant. Let us hear Archbishop Wake, as a representative of the 
 whole body. After expressing himself strongly in favour of 
 Episfcopacy as an institution, in his opinion, from the Apostolic 
 age, he proceeds. " In the mean time, I am far from being so 
 uncharitable as to believe, that any of those (Presbyterian) 
 churches, on account of this defect, (want of bishops,) ought to 
 be cut off from our communion; nor can I, by any iiiearis, join 
 with certain warf writers among us, in denying the validity of their 
 sacraments, and in calling in question their rightto the name of 
 jChrifltian Churche?." Yet "Toleration" can talk about the in- 
 validity of Presbyiirian ordinations ; and thus, as it should seem, 
 put himself, off as a better Churchman than the Archbisliop of 
 Canterbury? "There are some men," says Sancho, 'Svho want 
 better bread than can be made of wheat." 
 
 But we will come nearer home. Bishop White, of Pennsyl- 
 vania, remarking* on the opinion that Episcopacy is not of divine 
 right, observes : "This he believes to be the sentiment of <Ae 
 great body of Epifcppalians in Aintrica; in which respect they 
 J)ave in tlieir favour, unquestionably, the sense of the Church of 
 England, and, as he believes, the opinions of her most distin- 
 guished prelates for piety, virtue, and abilities." Bishop White, 
 jt should be remembered, is the senior Bishop of ihe American 
 
48 
 
 EpisQopate, and liolds the rank, though not the title, of Arch- 
 tiishop* of the Episcopail Church of the United States ; and a 
 inan every way deserving this high eminence, by his talents,, his 
 learning,, his piety, and Christian libejraEty. When "Tolerati<M)" 
 again finds occasion to write on the subject of the invaKdity of 
 Presbyterian ordinations, he would do well to recollect,, that 
 raodesty would diptate to him, not hastily to contradict his betters. 
 
 In my opinion, therefore, whatever objections may be brought 
 against the (Jjollege test, those actually brought, come with a 
 poor grace from any genuine Episcopalian. Undoubtedly, the 
 reasons for the test, in this particular form, cannot now be urged 
 with thje same force, as when it was first introduced. There is 
 now as little dapger of the prev^ence of the doctrine of the di- 
 vine right of Bishops, as of the dipine right of Saybrook Fhu 
 form; and as little danger of either, as of the prevaleace of the 
 doctrine of Papai Supremacy. Passion should not be iatrodun) 
 ced into this question. We have to deal with reasonable men; 
 and, without doubt, the rights of ^all will be respected. .^ 
 
 I wijl conclude witli.thfii following observations from Bisbdp 
 Watson, whiph "Toleraiion." is requested to consider in the li^{; 
 of ao Episcopal censwe. They are likewise recommended, ]Ki 
 the serious CQ^ideration of all other bigots, by whatever name 
 th.?y' may be called., 
 
 Says this truly Christian Bishop : " What ! shall the Church 
 of Christ never be freedt from the na.rrow-mindEd contentioijs of 
 bigots ; from the insults of men who know not what spirit they 
 are of, when they would stint the Omnipotent in the exercisq of 
 his mercyi, and bj^r the doors of heaven against every sect but 
 their own ? Shall we, never learn to think more humbly of our- 
 selves, and less despicably of others.!"' And again. — " duifcho 
 men as well as Dissenters, and Dissenters as, well as' Church- 
 men, are apt to give a degree of assent to opinions beyoDd 
 what they caa give a reason for. This is the very essence of 
 prejudice. It is difficult for any, man, entirely to divest himself 
 of all, prejudice ; but he may surely take care that it be not ac- 
 companied with an uncharitable propensity to stigmatize with 
 reproachful appellations, those who cannot'^^neasure the recti- 
 tude of the divine dispensations by his rule ; nor seek their way 
 to heaven by insisting on the path which he,, in OTcrweening wis- 
 dom, has arrogantly prescribed as the only one which can lead 
 men thither." EUSEBIUS. 
 
 * Archbishop ! What is the motive for introducing this word ? Isthere 
 
 any othtr object than to bring odium upon the Episcopal Church ? 
 
 Jpapal supremacy also ! Would not the miraculous conversions of the 
 present day prove as near an affinity to Popery, and to its store-house of 
 merits and qualifications for distribution and sale, and for discerning the 
 spirits of the elect, as the Dtwne right of a Deacon, or of a Bishop?— 
 Cease, the», E«sebius, to slander Episcopacy. Pdb. ! 
 
4.9- 
 
 No. XI. 
 
 Mil. EDITOR, 
 
 YOU will, I hope, pardoh this intrusion of an old customer,- 
 who is seldom troublesome to you in this way, and who now re- 
 luctantly craves the privilege of oecupying a column of your pa- 
 per, which has heretofore been devoted to purposes of more 
 utility than that of gratifying party scribblers. Of this descrip- 
 tion, however, may be ranked the correspondent in' your "num- 
 ber of the 28th Nov. who attempts an e]aborate reply to the 
 writer under the signature of Toleration, in the preceding num- 
 ber, on the subject of the Bonus. — Had the respondent observed 
 an equal degree of calmness and equanimity of temper, with the 
 writer of Toleration, he. needed not to usher his production into 
 the wo'ld without any signature real of fictitious,* like one of 
 those foundlings " whose graceless parents scorn to own them." 
 But in this omission, perhaps he was governed more by cunning 
 than' candour. In his animadversions on theperformance of Tol- 
 eration, he introduces his subject thus : — " That piece, v/hich, in 
 my view, was Written with more zeal than knoyvledge, and more 
 passion than truth." It is not iijipossibk but he may find some 
 depraved minds, who may unite with him' in this sentiment: but 
 many very judicious and candid judges have expressed a con- 
 trary opinion j nor have they withheld the meed of applause and 
 approbation Irora .the author of Toleration, for his cool and dis- 
 passionate discussion of a subject calculated to create unpleasant 
 feelings in the minds of those who were disappointed at the final 
 disposition of the Bonus. Had our namelessauthor done justice 
 to the feelings he betrays, he would have assumed the signature 
 of Jinti-Toleratior^, a cbatacter doubtless more congenial with 
 his temper and disposition. His method of treating his op- 
 ponent is not calculated to invite that " humility and candour," 
 which, Ae expects, should he "be corrected." 
 
 After passing such sort of compliments on the writer whom- 
 ke opposes, he process to entertain us with a tedious history of 
 the conduct of the Legislature, in the management of the pe- 
 tition- for the Bonus. In this part of his labour, he might have 
 spared iiimself the trouble of his repetitions ; for every one who 
 is in the least conversant with those public transactions, knows- 
 how often the petition was bandied about from one House to 
 the other, ^s prudence and policy suggested; and after comparing 
 notes,-(no intrigue in the case, to be sure,) passed in one branch, 
 and was negatived in the other. Then changing sides, and final- 
 ly, after coming to a right understanding with each other, and 
 discovering the " cloven foot," amicably terminated the business 
 
 *In justice to the writer in question, it ought to be observed, that 
 the omission of his signature, ("Hamilton,") was purely accidental. 
 
 [GOTT. Hsfl.AI.Ji.} 
 
 G 
 
50 
 
 to the great coniforl and satisfaction of such Aiiti-Tolcrationists. 
 as the writer in question. Rut whether this final decision is con- 
 sonant to the principles of strict impartiality, is left to the judg- 
 ment of future times. At any rate, if our champion has the dex- 
 terity of exonerating that honourable body from the suspicion of 
 an apparent inconsistency of conduct, when one branch at one 
 time voted for the petition, and the other negatived it — then 
 shifting sides, and finally, one house being so far illuminated as 
 to tack right about, with the exception ofone solitary vote, — L 
 say, if there is no a[jpearance of inconsistency in such proceed- 
 ings, so much ta the creditand honour of those concerned. Poor 
 Yalfe- College ! Had not thy fortune been coupled with that 
 odious character, a Bishop, the sound of which is so grating to 
 the ears of sorrre Christians, and those of the elect, too, thy suc- 
 cess had been infalhble. But patience, patience ! — a plan is 
 maturing for thy benefit — a Botanic Garden, and State Almsi- 
 House, is to be placed under thy jurisdiction ; and thus, tliis am- 
 phibious creature, the Bonus, "the child of intrigue and the 
 mother of discord," is to be put under the fostering care of a. 
 capable dry nurse. 
 
 N^ot having the honour of the least acquaintance with the au^ 
 thor of Toleration, I shall leave him to vindicate himself, not 
 doubting of his competency, without descending to the low scur- 
 rility of his antagonist ; nor shall I take up more room to notice 
 the exultation he manifests at the conduct of a- few Episcopal- 
 ians, "who were (he says) candid enough to acknowledge tiiat 
 their claim was gipoundless." It is believed their number were 
 small indeed, who made such' acknowledgment: but that many 
 of them disdained to persevere in solicitations which they were 
 convinced would prove unavaihng. The writer of this is no- 
 friend to controversy, either Religious or Political ; and for that 
 reason, will pass by with silent contempt, the stale slang at the 
 "Divine right of Bishops:" but to the candid and judicious part 
 of your readers, it will bfc sufficient to observe, that such an ofR- 
 cer is deemed by Episcopalians, essentiaFto the due organiza- 
 tion of their Church ; and without him, their system is incom- 
 plete and defective — and they believe that such a character is of 
 Apostolic usage, agreeable to Scripture, and has existed in the 
 Christian Church through all ages, from the Apostles down to 
 this lime. This they believe; but arc far from obtruding their 
 belief on others. Those who would wish to know whether they 
 have any well founded supporters of their opinion and belief, are 
 referred to Slater's answer to Sir Peter King — to William Law's 
 three Letters to Bishop Hoadley, in refutation of the vagaries 
 and conjectures of Archdeacon Bailey— and recently, to Doctor 
 Bowden's two Lettejfs to President Stiles. Neither of tho?e 
 writers have, been answered to this day; and probably never 
 will be. A FRIEND TO TOLERATION. - 
 
 Fairfield County, Dec. 1815. 
 
fi 
 
 No. XII. 
 SEABURY COLLEGE* 
 
 TBR. STEELE, 
 
 Sir, — OURS is the closing turn: but, for the present, we 
 waive this privilege, and proceed to adduce further testimony, 
 that a religious test is required of the officers of Yale College. 
 But before this is done, it is incumbent on us to parry the lance 
 •aimed at the vitals' oT the Episcopal religion, by our opponent, 
 who brands with bigotr)' and intolerance the doctrine of the " di- 
 vine right of Bishops." And should his arm be resistless in this 
 stab at our religion, we will cheerfully grant that our cry for im- 
 partiality and toleration is out of place. And here we will lay 
 before our readers tbefct paragraph -of President Clap's Histo- 
 ry of Yale College. 
 
 " The original and primary design of the institution of colle- 
 " ges and superior schools of learning, was to educate young 
 " men for the work of the Ministry : And therefore they have 
 ^' been generally esteemed to be of Divine Institution, and 
 " were commonly called the' Schools of the Church. To this ef- 
 , '' feet, the Fathers of JVeio'-EnfJand declare their sentiments in 
 " sundry expressions in their early synodical acts. 'That we 
 " read in Scripture of Schools and Colleges : That they are ne- 
 " cessary for the training up of such in good literature as may be 
 " called to the office of a Pastor or Teacher in the Church: 
 " That the Doctor or Teacher was instituted both for the Church- 
 " es and the Schools^ That Samuel, Elijah, and Elisha, were 
 " Presidents of the Schools of the Prophets :' And that ' Eccle- 
 " siastical history informs us that great care was taken by th« 
 " Apostles and their immediate Successors, to settle Schools in 
 " all places where the Gospel had been preached ; that so the 
 " interest of Religion might be preserved, and the truth propa- 
 ■'^ gated to succeeding generations.' " 
 
 it appears from this extract, that the Fathers of New-England 
 believed in the Divine institution of CoHeges; and if they be- 
 lieved in the Divine appointment of officers, without whom the 
 institution would be useless, (especially since Samuel, Elijah, and 
 Elisha, were presidents of the schools of the prophets, and that 
 the doctor or teacher was instituted both for the churches and 
 the schools,) they were not far from the doctrine of the Divine 
 right of Bishops. And on the ground of reason, and the analogy 
 derived from civil governments, this tenet is well founded, and 
 
 * See nth Vine of tbe 9th page, where ^ grant for a charter of a Col- 
 lege to Churchmen, is mentioned as one of the two provisos, which wiH 
 remove the complaints of Episcopalians. The College was introduced 
 with the Phoenix premium, and is now as much the appropriata subject 
 for discussion, as the pre«ii,um of the Phwnix Bunk. Pvb. 
 
52- 
 
 ^onsisteot with true liberty. The republican forms of the vari' 
 ©us constitutions in this country agree in this particular, that one 
 person presides. The Governor is our chief magistrate, from 
 whom all commissions flow. The President is the «hief officer 
 in the government ef the Uoited States. This form is then con- 
 sidered as insuring the most freedom to the people, and is most 
 agreeable to the genuine spirit of Republicanism. _ In all these 
 constitutions, there are grades of officers commissioned by the 
 principal magistrate. A divided Executive is thought to be ir- 
 responsible and unstable. 
 
 If, then, the institution of colleges be of Divine appointment, 
 why should not the institution of officers be of Divine appoint- 
 pient? And if the institution of ministers', of deacons, and of a 
 particular church, be of Divine original, where is the bigotry or 
 intolerance in the belief that a Bishop has the power of admin- 
 istering discipline, and of ordaining ministers in the church, and 
 that he possesses these powers by Divine institution .'' 
 
 In the Saybrook Platform, p. 108 of the edition of ISIO, are 
 these words : " We agree that the ministerial office is instituted 
 by Jesus Christ," &:c. — and p. 114,," We agree, that the office of 
 deacon is of Divine appointment," &;c. — and in p. 106, " We 
 agree, that particular societies o* visible saints, who, under Christ 
 their head, are statedly joined together, for ordinary communioa 
 with one another in all the ordinances of Christ, are particular 
 churches, and to he owned to each other as instituted churches 
 of Christ, though differing in apprehensions and practice in some 
 lesser things." 
 
 The president of the college, a minister of a church, its dea- 
 con, and a ch,urch of visible saints, then, actually claim a Divine 
 right: and why may not a Bishop be allowed to preside over a 
 diocese of Episcopalians, and be believed by them to exercise 
 his office by Divine right .'' 
 
 We are told by Presbyterians, that forms of government and 
 modes of worship are of no . consequence : and we now assert 
 that the Saybrook Platform canonizes the doctrinal part of the 
 39 Articles of the Episcopal Church, at p. 1 16, in the following 
 svords: '" As to what appertains to soundness of judgment in mat^ 
 ters of faith, we esteem it sufficient that a church' acknewledge 
 the Scriptures to be the word of God, the perfect and only rule 
 of faith and practice ; and own either the doctrinal part of those 
 commonly called the Articles of the Church of England, or the 
 Confession or Catechism, shorter . or larger, compiled by the 
 Assembly at Westminster, or the Confession agreed upon at Sa? 
 yoy, to be agreeable to the said rule." If, then, forms of govern- 
 ment and m.odes of worship are not deserving of serious consider 
 ration, and the doctrines of the Episcopal Church are agreeable 
 to the " perfect and only rule of faith and practice," why should 
 jipt the Episcopal Church be viewed as Christian and tolerant, 
 
by those wbo differ from her, upon what they esteem to be im* 
 material points ? Whether the practice of eticonMitnicating those 
 conscientious members of the Congregational churches, who 
 have joined themselves to the communion of the Episcopal 
 church, be tolerant; or, whether such practice be consistent 
 with regarding the Episcopal communion as a Christian com- 
 munion, or the Episcopal Church as a Christian church, is not 
 within our province to determine.* Daily complaints are in the 
 mouths of the enemies of our church, that Episcopalians have 
 not preciseness in manners, nor fire in zeal; that the clergy have 
 not rigidness in discipline; but that they, in truth, have too 
 much liberality in doctrine, and too much charity in admission 
 of members to the eucharist. That we have not preciseness, 
 nor fire, is readily admitted; but that the clergy are unsound in 
 faith or negligent in duty, is the imputation of envy and malice. 
 The Fathers of New-England, in their early synodical acts, re- 
 specting the Divine right of the President; the Episcopalians, 
 in their doctrine of the Divine right of Bishops; the Congrega- 
 tionalists, in their Divine right of Ministers, of Deacons, and of 
 'Churches of visible Saints, 'in their construction of Scripture, 
 may all be in error ; but, upon the principles of reason and re-/ 
 ligion, they ought to be tolerated. 
 
 We have already given to our readers the form of a creed, 
 and the vote of the trustees of Yale College, excluding Episco- 
 palians from ofiice; and we now present them an example of the 
 removal from ofiice of Dr. Cutler, then Rector or President, be- 
 
 * In such a case, to excommunicate is to tolerate, not to persecute !-- 
 When a regular dismission is aslied for,' (there being no charge of immo- 
 rality,) the reply is, that a precedent will endanger the church. Previous 
 to departure, disbiilieving Calvinistic divinity, the souls (jf these victims 
 endure torture ; but, when this step is once taken, although denunciation 
 follows, and reputation is disgraced, conscience is '"void of offence," and 
 their bodies do not consume in the fires of persecution. This practice is 
 an enforcement of the utmost and final spiritual povrer. W h^it would be 
 the disposition as to tlie exertion of temporal power, is left to the judg- 
 ment of our readers. 
 
 Are we acquainted, Mr. Hamilton, with the meaning of our own signa- 
 ture ? And, by the way, this champion in the cause of religion and lite- 
 rature seems to be on the wane.f The Professor of the Medical Institu- 
 lion, who was formei-ly Tutor in our Alma Mater, denies being the author 
 of Hamilton ; and of course we were mistaken in the probability we 
 suggested respecting this insignificant circumstance. 
 
 [I Did this writer knowt that the correspondence was about to be clo- 
 sed, and.that he and his faithful squire were to have the rest of the battle 
 ^1] to theniselves ? This instance of his courage indicates a great soul ! 
 
 COMP.] 
 
 f If the reader will turn to page 45, at the end of Hamilton's piece, he 
 will see that " Toleration" and "A Churchman" are without sufficient 
 "judgirtent and ability, or decency," to render necessary any further "rc- 
 pnarks" from Hamilton. Pub. 
 
•cause hewasEpiscoptillyiwrfmetZ, although he "had sDperioraiat- 
 «ral powers and learning :" It will be found in pages 31 and 32 j 
 and his character is given at pa,ge 78, which follows ;-" The Rev. 
 Dr. Timothy Cutler, formerly Rector of this college, died in Au- 
 gust, 1765 : he was educated at Harvard College in- Cambridge, 
 and graduated there in 1701. In the year 1710 be was ordain- 
 ed over a Church at Stratford, according to the constitution of 
 the churches m Connecticut. In 1719 he was chosen Rector of 
 the college, as before related. After his removal, be went to 
 England and took Episcopal orders, and received the degree of 
 Doctor of Divinity from both the Universities of Oxford and 
 Cambridge; and afterwards was Rector of Christ Church in 
 Boston about 40 years. He was a gentleman of superiour natur 
 ral powers and learning ; had entertained a high opinion of the 
 constitution of ithe Church of England, and was zealously at- 
 tached to it." — This example was, without doubt, recorded to 
 exhibit to posterity the abhorrence in which the Trustees held, 
 not the Divine right of the rninister, who was President of the 
 cbllege, (who now enjoys tenfold more power than any Bishop 
 on this continent,) not the Divine right of a Deacon, " to re-t 
 ceive, lay out and distribute the church's stock to its proper uses 
 by direction of the pastor and brethren, if need be;" not tbe 
 Divine institution of Colleges and Schools, which " the Apos- 
 tles took great care to settle in all places where the Gospel had 
 been preached;" nor the Divine institution oi particular church- 
 es oi visible saints, " though differing in arpprehensipns and prac- 
 tice, in some lesser things;" — no, not to show their hatred of 
 these exclusive forms of government : but this example was pub- 
 lished in the annals of the college, to inform mankind that llie 
 Corporation would not tolerate a. denomination of Christians, 
 who conscientiously believe the Divine right of a Bishop, or, 
 the Divine institution of the office of a Bishop, as well as of a 
 Minister and of a Deacon. 
 
 What magic is there in a name ! And what terror does tbe 
 word Bishop convey to the hearts of many uninformed, though 
 ■excellent men ! 
 
 There can be no doubt, then, that Episcopalian!? have been 
 and are excluded from holding offices in Y ale College ; — and the 
 officers of the Medical Institution are of necessity effectual agents 
 in the propagation of tbe doctrines of the Saybrook Platform, 
 from the existence of tbe test of religion, to which they are com- 
 pelled to subscribe in Yale College. This Platform was repub- 
 lished in 1810, by the approbation of the Association at Elling-i 
 ton, with the attestation of the Rev. Samuel Merwin as scribe to 
 that body of ministers; and is, at this time, the Confession of 
 Faith for the Corigregationalists or Presbyterians, as well as foV 
 the officers of Yale College. 
 But we are met here with this answer j-^-that EpisCopaKans 
 
55 
 
 should' not be permitted' to found SeEJ)ury College, with a cBai»- 
 ter and aid from the State, nor to receive any part of the Phos- 
 nix premium, agreeably to the offer of the petitioners for said 
 Phoenix Bank, because the sons of Episcopalians are allowed the 
 privilege of receiving an education in Yale College. And al- 
 though it be granted, that a creed is required of the officers, 
 which excludes Episcopalian's, and no other denomination of 
 Christians in this State;* and although it be admitted, that when 
 money is granted to Yale College from the treasury, this money 
 is in truth a salary for the support of Presbytarian officers in that 
 seminary, — yet, the circumstance that our children are not for- 
 bidden to attend the Episcopal Church on Sunday, places both 
 upon a level as to the favour of the Assembly : and this circum'^ 
 stance is sufficient e^id€,nce of liberality, and of the non-exist- 
 ence of the creeds to weigh down the counteracting agency pro- 
 duced by extemporaneous prayers of the morning and evening- 
 through the- week, — the lecture from the President on Divinity 
 averyJMonday from Vincent's Catechism, which the scholars are 
 eompelled to study, — and, indeed, the entire influence of the 
 Corporation and Anthority of the College ! In truth, this privi- 
 lege of not forbidding the sons of Episcopalians to attend the 
 Episcopal Church on Sunday, is good policy, for seturing influ- 
 ence over young minds, which influence the officers ought to- 
 enjoy. It is the true way of propagating their own creed; and 
 it is believed that Roman Catholics, or Jews, or Turks, would 
 and ought to make use of similar liberality to Pi'otestant Chris- 
 tians, in their literary establishments. We do not blame the of- 
 ficers of College for thus showing their liberality; — it is becom- 
 ing condiescension.; — it is praiseworthy conduct : but this very 
 conduct gives authority to their opinions, both religious and lit- 
 erary, (and ought thus to do,) — and respect and veneration to 
 their persons. Liberality,, in this case, (as it should m every 
 case,) receives an ample reward — an ability to propagate with 
 more success the creed of the officers; and the disposition thus 
 to propagate their religious tenets, is their duty, in consequence 
 of the Saybrook Platform creed, which they have publicly read,. 
 as their own. in the Yale College chapel. 
 
 The sons ef Episcopalians bemg educated in Yale College^ 
 
 » This is not true,! (saya^ Hamilton.) The Episcopalians can subscribe 
 to the Sajbroolt, Platform, and their officers in College have so suhscri- 
 l)pd it, because it recognizes the 39 Articles. But it does not recognizs 
 all the doctrines of other sects. Comf. 
 
 JThe Sajbronk Platform recognizes the doctrinal, but not the govern- 
 mental part of the 39 Articles. Episcopalians cannot. President Cutici- 
 and otheis would not, subscribe -to the Saybrook Platform, as to ordina- 
 tion and government. There is but one instance, we believe, where an 
 Episcopalian has subscribed to this Platform ; and that instance will b* 
 »een'btf(ii-e the reader finishes this number.- Pfb. 
 
56 
 
 Slid beiriff permiUed to attend the Episcopal Church oil Sufi' 
 day, do not then justify the Legislature in rejecting the prayers . 
 .for the establishment and endowment of Seabury College, — ^nor 
 do these circumstances chalnge the nature of the claim of the 
 Trustees of the Bishop's Fund to their part of the Phcenix pre- 
 mium. 
 
 But it is said, that similar creeds exist in the colleges of Mas- 
 sachusetts and other States ; and therefore Episcopalians ought 
 not to complain that our Legislature has repeatedly denied to 
 them the privilege of a charter for a college. Whether the 
 facts respecting the creeds be thus exclusive against Episcopa- 
 lians only, we are not informed ; but, is it not a fact, that their 
 Legislatures have refused to grant toUegesfto Episcopalians in 
 their respective States ; and if they have thus treated Episcopa- 
 lians, it is a fact, that tiiey have beein partial in their munificence 
 to one sect,-— a sect of favour, — a sect of patronage. 
 
 Again,' it is said, that in the course of 114 years, (the Col- 
 lege being founded in 1701,) two persons who were brought up 
 in the Episcopal Church, have been Tutors in Yale College, 
 one of v.'hom has never since attended the church, although 
 there is an Episcopal one where he resides ; and the other gen- 
 tleman, notwithstanding his subscription to the creed, is still a 
 member of the church of his youth. He was young and incon- 
 siderate. He has since returned 40 his " first love." How 
 rigidly haveibeen carried into execution the " principal design 
 of the pious 'founders of this college, to train up youth accord- 
 ing to the doctrine, discipline and mode of vsrorship practised in 
 the Congragational churches of this colony, and to grownrf them 
 in polemical divinity, according to the Assembly's Catechism, 
 Dr. Ames' Medulla, and Cases' of .ConsQience ; and not to 
 suffer them to be instructed in any different principles or doc- 
 trines !" Clap's history, page 61. No Episcopalian, except one 
 of the gentlemen just alluded to, has ever been permitted to be 
 a Tutor, without subscription to the creed. In his case, it is 
 understood, there was a change of some of the articles. A Mr. 
 Prown aZferct? his 'mind withrespect to the government of the 
 Congregational churches, after he was chosen.Tutor, and was re- 
 moved from oflice with Dr. Cutler ; or, as the vote runs, the Trus- 
 stees accepted of his resignation ! Only three cases can be found 
 in this long. tract of time. One, forced to resign, for alterirrg his 
 sentiments ; one, now a Presbyterian, although his conscience 
 was not encroached upon ; and one, still a'thorough Episcopa- 
 lian,, notwithstanding his youthful aberration. President Clap 
 states the number of graduates* to be one Episcopalian in ten ; 
 
 * This is a mistake, it slinuld he ministers instead of graduates. But 
 We all know the number of Episcopal graduates to have been very coa- 
 sideraWe ; probably in .nearly the same ratio as that of ministert.-^PuB. 
 
57 
 
 but only two Episcopalians liave been chosen fo the office of 
 Tutor. All the rest have not possessed sufficient abilities ! ! 
 How zealously, faithfully, and masterly, is the creed of the 
 pious founders of this corporation transmitted to posterity ! " It 
 is totally impracticable," says Hamilton, " that any literary in- 
 ttitution, (and nothing but bigotry itself would give any other ap- 
 pellation to our college,) to be conducted upon more fairandlib- 
 eral principles towards all denominations of religion, than Yale 
 College is, and always has been; and he who, with a knowledge 
 of this, can wage Gothic warfare against that institution, is a foe 
 to the best interests of the State.*' 
 
 An application was made to the Assembly, by Episcopalians, 
 in the fall of 1810, for the power of conferring honorary de- 
 grees in literature ; or, in other words, for the charter of a col- 
 lege, without funds. The Lower House were almost unanimous 
 in favour of this application ; but the Council opposed to the 
 unanimity of the Lower House a full negative. 
 
 At the same session, (yes, reader, at the same session, imme- 
 diately after the rejection of the Episcopal College,) Yale Col- 
 lege addressed the Legislature on the subject of the Medical 
 Institution ; and their prayer for a charter of annexation to the 
 mother seminary, was, of course, granted. Among other pro- 
 visions, of this act, Physicians are forced to study one term at 
 th« Medical College before they can be examined for a license 
 to practice. 
 
 In 1811, the Assembly were again asked by Churchmen for 
 a college, without funds from the State treasury. This petition 
 was rejected by a small majority in the Lower House, and by a 
 full vote in the Council. 
 
 At the public Commencement of 1813, was delivered to the 
 audience, an impressive speech on the utility of estabhshing a 
 Law Seminary in Yale College. The annexation of this learn- 
 ed profession to the Corporation, by the Assembly, has not 
 taken place in connexion with the Litchfield Law Seminary, 
 perhaps through fear (on the part of the Litchfield gentlemen) 
 of an embrace similar to that experienced by the Medical So- 
 ciety from the mother college.* 
 
 At the spring session of the year 1814, Yale College petition- 
 <d the Legislature for 20,000 dollars of the Phoenix premium, 
 to endow the Medical College. It was granted. The fatality, 
 however, attending the exertions of Churchmen, the same and 
 succeeding sessions, to get $10,000 of the Phcenix premiunj, 
 has already been exposed to the public. 
 
 • Can it be denied that tlie Officers of Yale College have sounded th« 
 Litchfield gentlpmen respecting n union ? and that it has been long in 
 contemplation to annex a Law Institution tuutbe University, with tb« 
 yeligioui test of Yale Collage ? 
 
 H 
 
58 
 
 At the last fall session, Yak College asked ibr f 30,000 ta 
 found a State Poor-House and Lunatic JJospital ; which ^30,000' 
 happens to be the exact amount of the remaining Phcenix pre- 
 initim. The Professor of Chemislry drew the petition ; and the 
 Churchmen in town were waited upon, to find out whether 
 •they were wilJing tO' relinquish their claim to their part, of the 
 .^30,000. Yale Cpllege established her creed in the Medical 
 Institution ; and why will she not provide one for the Lunatic 
 Hospital and State Poor-House ?. The Professor, of Chemistry, 
 ip that case, may be rewarded with a third salary. How unam- 
 bitious is this Presbyterian University ! And how little fear she 
 betrays towards a rivoJ in literature ; which rival will disgrace 
 Episeopahans by its insignificance ! But^ it seems, the treasury 
 is never to he.unIocked for the benefit of Seabury College. 
 
 The vote of the Corporation, which annuls or essentially ra,- 
 ries the creeds and statutes of 1753, has not been given to the 
 public, for a good reason,; it cannot he found; it does not 
 exist. ^ 
 
 It is a truth; then, that a religious test of faith is established 
 Ju Yale College. It is a truth, that the Assembly have refused 
 to grant a. charter for an Episcopal College , without funds for 
 Jts support. Jt is a -truth, that the Legislatuje have granted 
 ^20,000 to the Medical Institution of Yale College, which has 
 the same religious test of faith with the mother seminary. It is. 
 a truth, that the Legislature have withheld from Episcopalians 
 that part of the Phrenix p?emiun>, which w&s offered to themty 
 the petitioners for the Phoenix Bank. And now, reader, is it 
 not a truth, that, since Episcopalians have borne their propor- 
 tion of the burdens of taxation for the maintenance of Yale 
 College, (and, according to the view of Hamilton, of the Med- 
 ical Institution also,) w^ then, again ask, is it not a truth, that 
 Episcopalians, are treated with, injustice,, partiality und intole- 
 rance? 
 
 In the Medical Institution, no vote is valid without the. core- 
 sent ofthe President of Yale College. A"o physician can prac- 
 tice in our State, without ^studying in this institution, or in one 
 out of this State. 
 
 This looks something like a religious establishment. And 
 should the Law Students, he corapeiled, by a Law of this State, 
 to attend, the .instruction of oflicers of the Saybrook Platform 
 creed, the prospect of an establishment wou.ld be still more flat- 
 tering. Would not this he an accumulation of temporal power 
 in the breast of one man, however excellent and honourable, 
 which must be alarming to the best interests of the State .? Di- 
 vinity Students, (since the Legislature has rejected an Episco- 
 pal College,) are to be deprived of a liberal education, or to 
 seek it in neiglihoUring States, or- to pass through the operatioH 
 ©f the Test law, imposed upon the officers of Yale College. 
 
5^ 
 
 Among the amendments to the constitution of the United 
 States, vvhich v/ere ratified by the requisite number of the le- 
 gislators of our Union, this is the first article : — "Congress shall 
 make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohib- 
 iting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of 
 speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to 
 assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of-griev- 
 ances." And each member of our Assembly, when he takes 
 his seat, has administered to him, by -an authorised oificer, the 
 following oath : — " You, A, B. do solemnly swear to support the 
 constitution of the United States.'' 
 
 And thus m-uch for the toleration exhibited in the creeds and 
 statutes and practice of the Corporation of Yale College,; of 
 the Legislature of this State, and of the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 But we are told, that considerations of impartiality, of jus- 
 tice, of law, or of equity, will have no influence with our Le- 
 gislature, when their will* impels them to act. They will, say 
 these persons, regard no human power. Episcopalians shall not 
 have a College, nor their part of the Phoenix preanium. They 
 shall be kept down, at the expense of toleration. Ah ! is this 
 the language ofi Christians in the 19th century.'' A modern ex- 
 ample of power without principle, has been given to the world 
 by the'FreiJch nation and its Ruler. A series of tfiumphs was 
 on their side. 
 
 France is groaning mnder oppression, in retaliation for enor- 
 mities. 
 
 Bonaparte has been at Elba. Bonaparte, after a second over- 
 throw, in possession of enemies whom he defied and execrated, 
 is gnawing his vitals at St. Hekna ! ' 
 
 iSmcA friends to religion and the. literary institutions of our 
 Slate, thus representing the conduct of the Assembly, and man- 
 ifesting the disposition to tyrannize, should be careful not pro- 
 voke the vengeance of the Almighty! — There is no truth in 
 suggestions of this kind. Principle is the polar star which will 
 guide our councils. We are a Christian people. The day of 
 intimidation is past. TOLERATION. 
 
 *This WII.L wa« urged fo the Churchmen in this City, as a reason why 
 they should giv* up all hopes respi-cting the Premium, and join the Med- 
 io;il Professors in procuring the Lunatic Hospital and State Poor-House. 
 
 No. XIII. 
 To Conric'cticut EpiscdpuUans. 
 
 THE writer who now signs himself " Hamilton," it seems, 
 has atlast discQveredj that scurrility i« not the weapon of a 
 
60 
 
 Christian, and that niis-statements must in the end involve their 
 authors in defeat and disgrace. Indeed, the tenor of his last 
 number, especially when contrasted with the temper of his 
 first, gives us reason to hope, that, at least as far as you are 
 concerned, this writer has profited much, xerj much fiom hiss 
 discovery.* You are now no longer insulted with the assertion, 
 that your claims on the Legislature rests on the ricketty props 
 of " insidious petitions" " intrigue," " management," and " clo~ 
 venfeet." The respectable gentlemen selected from your num- 
 ber, as Trustees to your Bishop's Fund, are no longer pointed' 
 at as men who urged to the Legislature the " pleas of faction," 
 as an apology for their petition. And, what is more astonish- 
 ing than all, you, even you, Episcopalians, are really addressed, 
 and caressed, as a respectable body of Christians. Little was 
 it it to have been expected, that an attack commenced with 
 sneers and insult, would so soon have wound up with the sugary 
 sayings of flattery. This trick, however, comes too late, to 
 have its desired effect. The veil af deception is too frail and 
 flimsy, to pass without being detected- And you. Episcopa- 
 lians, I dare say, will feel but poor consolation in the choice of 
 evils, whether you are to be prostated by open enemies,, or 
 hugged to death by pretended friends. 
 
 As " Hamilton" has, however, in a fit of friendship, devoted 
 his.last labours to you; suppose you, in your turn, should claim 
 the privilege of a reply ; and in the heart-felt language of sin- 
 cerity, lay your case before him, for his friendly counsel and 
 advice. If I mistake not, you would address him somewhat in 
 substance as follows : 
 
 " You have boldly presented yourself to our notice, because 
 (as you say) you give us facts which are unanswerable, and 
 reasons which you think are incontrovertible. Although not 
 Presbyterians ourselves, yet we hope that we have too much 
 liberality to stop our ears against the arguments of others, or 
 to brace our bosoms against conviction, from whatever quarter 
 it may come. We are members of a church, which (whatever 
 others may say or think) has even wrung from your lips an ac- 
 knowledgment of its talents and its piety : a church, permit 
 us to add, which has alike withstood the assaults of Popery, anJ 
 the seductions of modern Infidelity — a church, which is uniting 
 its exertions with those of the great and good of other countries, 
 in carrying the comforts of Christianity to the misled millions of 
 the East ; and flashing Gospel light amid the gloom of Pagan- 
 
 * The gentleman need not flatter himself that I feel any " uncommon 
 rancour" towards him — Far otherwise — I have ever considered him as 
 quite apassife instrument in the controversy — a sort of go-between ; fiona 
 behiod which, oiUers are flinging their froth' and fi>Ilj pn the publie. 
 
61 
 
 ism. As members of this church, you are awai* e, we hold to tha 
 necessity of a learned and well regulated clergy. And surely 
 the candour, which you claim, must confess, that the first step 
 towards having our pastoral teachers respectable, (laying the 
 divine authority of bishops out of the question,) is to provide an 
 able and efficient ecclesiastical Head, to whom they are answera- 
 ble for their acts. To eifect this desirable object, we are unfortu- 
 nately in want of funds. Our necessities, however, might be much 
 relieved, if the State authorities would but loosen their hold 
 on the sum of ^10,000, which an association of gentlemen once 
 asked the privilege to giv^ us ; but which, in passing from the 
 hands of the donors to our Bishop's Fund, has somehow settled 
 itself in the strong boxes of the treasury. A donation double 
 in amount, destined at the same time, from the same associa- 
 tion of gentlemen, to the Medical Department of Yale College, 
 more fortunate than ours, passed through the treasury untouch- 
 ed, and has since reached the institution it was designed to ben- 
 efit. What makes our case still more cutting, some officious 
 friends of the college, not contented with the sum, which 
 they have so lucidly received, are making themselves unreasona- 
 bly busy (as it strikes us) to acquire even the humble ^i 0,000, 
 which was originally intended as a present to us. This is render- 
 ed still more surprising, because it is always coupled with the 
 reflection, that the most important individual donations, which 
 the college has ever received, came from the generosity of 
 Episcopalians ; and even the public grants, which the Legisla- 
 ture has occasionally made to the college, have been taken from 
 the pockets of Episcopalians, as well as from Presbyterians. 
 
 " It has indeed been said by grave legislators, and (if we 
 mistake not) you have seconded the assertion, that a grant to 
 the college is in truth a grant to Episcopahans ; inasmuch as 
 the college favours no particular denomination of Christians ; 
 but, on the contrary, stretches its motherly wings over all sects, 
 and almost over all religions. Suffer us, however, to appeal 
 from the unsupported assertions of individuals, to the history 
 and records of the college itself. These records, as we read 
 them, (and records youknow, cannot lie,) say, that all persons are 
 there excluded from office, whose creeds happen to vary from 
 ihefonnuln of the university ; and, as the occasion of introduc- 
 ing that formula, was the conversion of the President from 
 Presbyterianism to Episcopacy, and as it followed immediately 
 his removal, we cannot but beheve, till some contradictory 
 record is shown us, that it is levelled directly at those prelatic 
 principles, which we in our consciences believe to be correct. 
 And we may further add, our uniform experience wilf bear us 
 out in the belief, that this is the first time the coffers of the col- 
 lege were ever mistaken for the fund of a bishop. : 
 
 " Do not believe that we have arrayed ourselves against legis- 
 
62 
 
 hi\ve grants to literary institutions ;-far from it. I^iteratare 
 and relidon, doubtless, form tvro of the grandest objects, either 
 for legislative or individual munificence : and as the Phrenix 
 bonus as offered, embraced both those grand objects, we have 
 ever looked upon the bonus as no< staining the records of the 
 Assembly, (as has been done in other States,) with either a 
 bribe to the public, or to individuals. And we humbly hope, 
 that legislators (who emanate from people of different creeds) 
 will not mistake generosity to one institution (or justice to anoth- 
 er. Startle not at the recollection that our trustees urged our 
 claim to the Legislature as a matter of right. Episcopalia.ris, 
 who can remember that period of our State history,* wMeh 
 puritanical prejudices .(we need not tell you whosis) darkened 
 the destinies oT the church— when the sneer of contempt fol- 
 lowed an Episcopalian to the very threshold of his sanctuary— 
 when the finger of scorn was pointed even as he kneeled at the 
 altar, — would be the last persons to think of urging or expect- 
 ing any thing from the public authorities, as a matter oi favour. 
 Believe us then, when we assure you, it has never entered into 
 our imaginations, to draw mojney from the public, unless the 
 circumstances attending its receipt by the treasurer, (at least in 
 our view,) gave a fair title in our favour. You have indeed in- 
 formed us, that the trustees did not make out this title; and 
 for proof, refer us to your first number, and the act incorporating 
 the Phcenix Bank, as it stands in the statute book. We have 
 accordingly, with all due care, perused both those documents ; 
 but must nevertheless acknowledge that our first opinion remains 
 unshaken. 
 
 " In the essay-to ivhich you haVe referred us, for the facts 
 relative to the Phasnix bonus, you have said, that- the Council 
 instantly rejected the petition, (which had passed the Lower 
 House,) on the ground of the exceptionable clause controlling 
 the distribution of the bonus; and that the act incorporating the 
 Phoenix Bank was passed independent of any petition whatever. 
 The truth or falsehood of this position, as it strikes us, must con- • 
 stitute the hingfe on which bolji your arguments, and our claim, 
 must turn. Pardon us, therefore, if we here appeal from your 
 declaration to the declaration of the Hon. Council themselves. 
 We allude to the solemn declarations of that honourable body, 
 relative to this business, contained in a copious preamble \m i. 
 grant, which passed the Council in the spring of 1815; in which 
 preamble we are informed, they declared in substance as fol- 
 lows : — Whereas a petition was preferred to the General Assem- 
 bly, May session, 1814, praying for the incorporation of a bank, 
 
 * .\nfl yet Churchmen, in those days, " believed in the same Bible, 
 and the §ame atonement, and looked for the same heaven," as tfafV 
 
 BOW 
 
 do 
 
63 
 
 with one and a half milHon of dollars capital ; in which the pe- 
 titioners offered to pay into the treasury of the State therefor, 
 the sum of ^1^60,000, to be distributed in such sums as to the 
 General Assembly should seem fit, to Yale College, the Medical 
 Institution, and the Fund for the support of the Bishop of the 
 Episcopal Church in Connecticut : — And whereas an act was 
 thereon passed, incorporating the Phoenix Bank, and the sum of 
 ^50,000 paid therefor into the treasury : — And whereas the Gen- 
 eral Assembly, by an act passed May session, 1S14, granted to 
 the Medical Institution' of the College the sum of $'20,000, the 
 same being a part of saidi^um of $50,000, in conformity to the 
 prayer of said petition : — Now, therefore, in further pursuance 
 of said petition, and said act of incorporation. Be it enacted, 
 
 &c. We have not Tiere given you' the precise language of 
 
 this preamble, because the oi'iginal document has been, by some 
 busy-body, purloined from the office of the Secretary of State, 
 and cannot now be had. But we are warranted in averring, that 
 the terms of the instrument were at least as strong, if not strong- 
 er, than those above recited. Now,, we find it impossible for us 
 to believe, that the Hon. Council (whom you inform us rejected 
 the petition) ever could, or ever would, have drawn up a decla- 
 ration of this kind, thus counting on the petition, if they, at the 
 same time, (as you seem to suppose,) considered the same pe- 
 tition as a mere nullity, and as, indeed, rejected, " on the ground 
 of the exceptionable clause relating to the distribution of the 
 bonus;" unless, in truth, they had a secret will, in opposition to 
 their repealed will ; which is a doctrine, that we, as Churchmen, 
 cannot bring ourselves to recognize. 
 
 " But further; we find, upon comparing the act incorporating 
 the PhceniK Bank, with the original petition for the same, that 
 the act yields every thing asked for in the petition, except the 
 amount of capital, which is' fixed at one third less than was pray- 
 ed for. As, then, the Legislature have given the petitioners a 
 bank, corresponding precisely wjth the prayer of the petition, 
 except in amount of capital ; we humbly conceive that the Le- 
 gislature, by so doing, have as completely and effectually passed 
 the petition, (except so far as amount of capital is concerned,) as 
 ■if the magical words, "passed in the Upper House," had been 
 indorsed on the petition by the pen of the Secretary. We feel 
 ourselves further fortified in this opinion, by the fact, that the 
 act incorporating the Phosnix Bank is drawn up in language the 
 same, in all essentials, as the acts incorporating the Derby Bai)k 
 and the Eagle Bank; both of which institutions were incorpora- 
 ted on pititions. 
 
 V. " It is indeed insisted by some, that the petition for the Phos- 
 nix JJank left it to the wisdom of the Legislature to appropri- 
 ate the bonus to the institutions mentioned, or to keep it in the 
 treasury, as to their Honours seemed best. Place then, if you 
 
64 
 
 please, the case on tlie most favourable grounds, and let the ex- 
 pression of form (as we have heretofore considered it to be) be 
 in fact a direct authority to the Legislature to appropriate the 
 bonus either to the three institutions, mentioned m the petition, 
 or to dispose of it in such other way as to their Honours may 
 seem best. Still, however, as their Honours have made chMce 
 of one of the alternatives, and, instead of keeping the money 
 in the treasury, or investing the same in stock, have proceeded 
 to appropriate a part of the sum to one of the institutions men- 
 tioned in the petition ; they are bound, in good faith, to go for- 
 ward and fulfil the remainder of their trust, even if a fifth part 
 of .the money should be appropriated for the benefit of Connec- 
 ticut Episcopalians." 
 
 After you had thus laid your case before your new friend, 
 suppose he should tell you, (by way of triumphantly refuting 
 your .slender reasoning,) that, although no believer himself "in 
 legislative infallibility," yet, as your case has been decided by the 
 legislative powers, you must be crazy to think of questioning 
 the decision. And if you dare to appeal from the "powers 
 that be" to the many-headed monster, the public, you shall be 
 marched oif in a body to a mad -house ! — ■ Such, Episcopal- 
 ians, are the poor and puny shifts, to which your adversaries are 
 driven, in order to stifle inquiry. They cannot, they dare not, 
 meet you in the field of argument. — They may, for a while, at- 
 tempt to brow-beat you with ribaldry and rant ; but when that 
 is finished, they are willing to quit the controversy on any terms. 
 
 A CHURCHMAN. 
 
 No. XIV. 
 
 Mr. Editor., > 
 ALTHOUGH you refused, (improperly as I think, because T 
 was only respondent in a question which others had started,) to 
 insert my IVth number in your last week's paper, you will at 
 least suffer me to repel an incorrect insinuation, contained in one 
 of the notes of "A Churchman" in the same paper. This in- 
 sinuation, entirely foreign from the question, improperly impli- 
 cates third persons, who have had no share in this controyersy ; 
 and is as mean and ill-natured towards them, as it is unjust to- 
 wards "Hamilton." Let me inform "A Churchman" then, (and 
 your, readers generally,) that whatever relation or concert may 
 have existed between him and "Toleration" — "Hamilton" ac- 
 knowledges no leader in a contest witlf such opponents ; nor Ijas 
 he once stooped to ask any assistance. He stands alone; and not- 
 withstanding the various and blundering guesses of "Toleration" 
 and "A Churchman," he alone is responsible Ibr the pieces sign- 
 
65 
 
 ed by him, or in any way purporting to be his, which have yet 
 been suffered to appear in the Herald. Will they guess again ? 
 or, can they now feel that this is an ungentlemanly practice ? 
 
 This is the second time, that out of mere justice to third per- 
 sons, he' has been obliged to contradict the unfounded sutmises 
 of these writers. HAMILTON. 
 
 No. XV. 
 
 COJK-CLUDIJVG NUMBER. 
 
 Mr. Steele, 
 . WE have thought that " guessing" was allowable in our land 
 of " steady habits;" and that no person, even "Hamilton," would 
 consider it "ill-natured and mean towards third persons, or un- 
 just towa-rds himself," to " guess" at the author of the " trium- 
 phant refuter" of his opponents' " arguments and propositions." 
 We haVe suggested that this author was probably a Medical 
 Professor, who had formerly been Tutor in Yale College ; and 
 this suggestion we retracted in our next piece, because the Pro- 
 fessor of Chemistry and Professor of Anatomy in the Medical 
 Institution waited upon you, Mr. Steele, and demanded the au- 
 thor of " Toleration ;" whose name you gave up to these gen- 
 tlemen : and because one of the Professors called upon the wri- 
 ter of this article, and denied that he wrote the pieces signed 
 Hamilton. 
 
 These gentlemen were not content with "guessing;" they 
 have ascertained the name and seen the person of the writer of 
 " Toleration ;" and you, Mr. Steele, are bound to give to us 
 Hamilton's name, provided we should make a demand similar 
 to that of the Professors of the Medical Institution. . But, Mr. 
 Steele, you, need not suspect our intention of taking this course 
 with the person who calls so many hard names ; since we have 
 commenced with suggesting a probability, or, if Hamilton will 
 have it, so, since we have .once mistakenly "guessed," we shall 
 leave the public, if they wish, to find out the name of this gen- 
 ,tleman in their own way. Without descending to personal dis- 
 putation, perhaps we may be indulged in relating a story, which 
 has-been brought to mind in consequence of this writer's soli- 
 citude respecting himself. A Frenchman was introduced fo one 
 , of the petty Chiefs in Africa ; and after the customary saluta- 
 tion, the Chief asked with earnestness — What, Sir, does' the 
 French Nation say about me ? Am / not talked much of in 
 Paris .'' 
 
 What " A Churchman" probably meant by insinuating that 
 Hamilton had received assistance, was owing to the circurastancs 
 
66 
 
 of his first piece being little more than a repetition- of the talk- 
 ing*m the Lower House on the subject; 
 
 To Eusebius* we will say, that the public are interested with 
 facts, arid not with pe'rsonal altercation. Eusebius directs us to 
 look'at the "head of- the Episcopal Church in England." If 
 he means to insinuate that the King of England is head of the 
 Episcopal Church in England, or that he is fiead of the Presby- 
 terian Church in Scotland,- in any other sense, than as a tempo- 
 ral or civil head, his insinuation is as well founded as if he had 
 said that the Assembly, in 1 708, when they established the Say- 
 brook Platform, Confession of Faith, and form of Church gov- 
 ernment, was the' spiritual head of the Congregational Church 
 in Connecticut. Neither of these Churches, nor the Episcopal. 
 Church in the Unhed States, acknowledge any other spiritual 
 head, than the Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ ; 
 from whom flows all spiritual authority in the church. 
 
 Churchmen feel no gratitude for the charity displayed by 
 Yale College towards the ordination by Bishops, (in the Epis- 
 copal sense,) which charity represents Episcopacy as " most 
 convenient, or expedient, or as proper to be complied with as a 
 civil establishttient, or, as founded in human policy, invention, or 
 imagination. They feel the same gratitude for such charity, as 
 when Yale College denounces ordination by Bishops as " Pre- 
 latical and Arn)inian corruptions, dangerous to the purity and 
 peace" of Presbyterian or Congregational Churches. And they 
 feel the same thankfulness for the charity which turns out of of- 
 fice every Tutor, Professor or President, who is" suspected of an 
 inclination'''' to Episcopacy, 
 
 Is this charity, or is it bigotted intolerance .'' Since you, Mr.. 
 Steele, have allowed " Hamilton" in his piece in your paper, to 
 give the subject we introduced to the public, a compieaiomjvhich 
 we never designed it should receive, viz. that it is a contest between 
 iiidimduals, we think, sir, that every impartial man will justify 
 you in the admission of the following facts, which will og-aiw pre- 
 
 *This miter has collected his mattorfrom Dr. Miller, who has written 
 -two volumes to prove that Episcopacy is a human contrivance to aid 
 Prelates in usurping the powers of the Presbytery. He was answered 
 by .poctors Bovvden and Howe, whom he attacked with spleen and bit- 
 terness, and retired from the controversy with statelinitss and noisy ohit- 
 ity. 
 
 Eusebius' fi'equeut use of " bigot," renders him liable to the suspicion 
 of saying, "Stand off, fur 1 am holier than thou." 
 
 ^nft-seclarian charity resembles French philusophism. It professes so 
 much, and feels so little, that either infidelity or persecution comes withia 
 its embrace. 
 
 Since. Doctor Miller, in his life of Doctor Rogers, has returned to the 
 combat. Doctor Huwe has in the press a well written volume in answer 
 to this champion. 
 
67 
 
 sent to your readers the true subject-matter for their considera- 
 tion. Prejudice aside, our right to conclude this controversy is 
 beyond question. . Having first brought these facts before the 
 public, it is. certainly fair that we should not only be permitted 
 to recapitulate them ; but also to free them from,. what, we con- 
 ceive to be, improper management. Not admitting personal 
 ■ invective, we considered the subject important to the general in- 
 terests of our State ; and this was the motive which impelled the 
 writer to take the responsibility of introducing it into the col- 
 umns of the Herald. 
 
 We have stated that a test of religious faith is requirerfof the 
 officers of Yale College and of the Medical Institution ; that this 
 test has operated to exclude from office all Episcopalians (wheth- 
 er they believed in the validity or invalidity of Presbyterian or^ 
 dinations) except two persons, from the foundation of the col- 
 lege in 1701, to this time: that the Medical Students, before they 
 can practise physic, are forced by law, either out of the State, 
 or are forced to study one term at the Medical Institution, un- 
 der these test officers : that the Legislature has twice deniedEpis- 
 copalians a charter without funds for Seabury College ; that the 
 petitioners for the Phoenix Bank offered to the Bishop's Fund 
 one third part of ^'50,000 ; which sum the Assembly would not 
 suffer them to pay to the trustees of that fund : that the same 
 petitioners offered at the same time to endow the Medical In- 
 stitution with one third of -the same $50,000; and that the As- 
 sembly, at the same session, appropriated ^20,000 to said Insti- 
 tution, a greater sum than the petitioners o^eret?. 
 
 In the Fall session of 1810, Churchmen applied for a charter 
 for Seabury College — which was rejected ; but before the ses- 
 sion closed, Yale College petitioned for the Medical Institution, 
 and it was annexed to the Mother College. In the fall of ISll, 
 Churchmen made another application for a College, which was 
 a.gs.m refused ; but Yale College has not only heen favoured 
 with the Medical Institution, but has also had $20,000 appro- 
 priated for the mutual benefit of both establishments. 
 
 At the last session, Yale College petitioned for $30,000 to 
 erect a Lunatic Hospital amd State Poor-Housc ; which petition, 
 because the Assembly wanted to adjourn, was laid over to the 
 next session in May. The Litchfield Law Seminary is to be 
 joined to Yale College, provided sufficient funds will be given 
 for its endowment, by the State. ^ 
 
 The Medical institution and |20,000, do not satisfy Yale Col- 
 lege ; but a Law Institution, and the whole of the |50,000 premi- 
 um must be yielded to her ambition. 
 
 Not one of these have been denied to be fads by Hamilton, 
 or Eusebius. 
 
 LeJ common sense, then, decide whether Episcopalians have 
 
68 
 
 a fair daJm to their jpa,rt of t^e Phcenix premium ; and to a 
 charter for Seabury College; and whether, if the Assembly per- 
 sist in rejecting these claims, Episcopalians are treated with lib- 
 erality, or impartiality, or equity, or justice; or with a free, full 
 and real, or with a narrow, specious and false 
 
 ' ^ TOLERATION. 
 
 [jffere the controversy ended in the Connecticut Herald. The 
 TVth Number 0/ Hamilton, addressed to Lokman, and to which 
 the following essay is a reply, may be found (page 63,^ in the Com- 
 pilation issued by Hamilton. As itis already before thepublic in 
 a pamphlet, and was not one of the original numbers as published 
 in the Herald, it has been here omitted.^ Pcb. 
 
 No. XVI. 
 
 "Long in the field of words we may contend ; 
 " Reproach is infinite, and knows no end ; 
 " Arm'd or with truth or falsehood, right or wrong, 
 • " So voluble a weapon is the tongue, 
 
 " Wounded, we wound ; and neither side can fail, 
 
 " For every man has equal strength to rail. 
 
 " Women, alone, vvhen in the streets they jar, 
 
 "Perhaps excel us in this wordy war ; 
 
 " Like us they stand, encompass'd with the crowd, 
 
 "And vent" their anger, impotent and loud. 
 
 " Cease then." 
 
 Pope's Iliad, lib. xx. v. 294— 304. 
 
 TO be engaged in an interminable succession of answers and 
 rejoinders upon a subject which originally occupied a vei^ sm^l 
 compass, and which has been already completely exhausted, is 
 both a fruitless waste of time, and a criminal abuse of reasoning. 
 The attachment of a writer to the cause he has espoused, is al- 
 most indissoluble ; and, with a kind of feline tenacity of life, he 
 resolutely clings to his principles till he has been the ninth time 
 knocked on the head. The inflexible pride of self-consistency 
 will not permit either of the antagonists to yield the privilege of 
 giving the last blow; and the controversy, which was commenced 
 from a mutual persuasion that each had the right side of the 
 question, is continued through the single . motive of seeing who 
 shall keep the field. Never, perhaps, were these observations 
 more signally exemplified, than in the dispute which has grown 
 out of the refusal of the Legislature to appropriate a part of the 
 Phoenix Bonus to the uses of the Bishop's Fund. Restricted to 
 the legitimate topics of discussion, this dispute might hare been 
 easily settled in the compass of a few paragraphs ; and, while 
 
69 
 
 it was confined to the columns of a newspaper, no person dream- 
 ed of the " infinite«deal of nothing"' which was weekly accumu- 
 lating on the subject. But, since the controversy has been 
 transferred to a more extensive field of argumentation, and all 
 the little streams of the newspaper have been collected in the 
 .vast reservoir of a pamphlet, — what an ocean of words do we 
 see, with here and there a solitary argument floating upon the 
 discussion, — rari nantes in gurgite vasto ! 
 
 It would be unaccountable how such a volume of discussion 
 should have been elicited from so confined a subject as that 
 which relates to the Bishop's Bonus, had it not been for the in- 
 troduction of extraneous questions, — or, more properly speak- 
 ing, had not the narrow controversy about a single act of the 
 Legislature been converted into the illimitable cavillings of a 
 religious dispute. This strange aberrance from the original 
 track of discussion, has hardly a parallel; except it be an in- 
 stance mentioned by CicerO; in which .a controversy, which be- 
 gan about music, was consumed in a disputation concerning the 
 rationality of wisdom and the utility of virtue. The advice 
 which he gives on the occasion, ought to be treasured up in the 
 memories of all those who are prone to fly off from the subject 
 in hand : — " Verendum est, ne de alia re dicatur, cum alia de re 
 controversia sit, Jnque hujusmodi vitio considerandutn est, ne aut 
 ad rem addatur quid, aut quippiam de re detrahatur ; aut tola 
 causa mutata in aliam causam derivetur : uti apud Pecuvium 
 Zethus cum Amphione, quorum controversia cum de niusica in- 
 ducta sit, disputatio in sapientiae rationem et virtutis utilitatem 
 consumitur."* Cib. Ad. Keren, lib. ii. sec. 26. 
 
 The danger of protracting the dispute concerning the Bish- 
 op's Bonus into an endless series of alternate accusations and 
 recriminations, at first determined me to pass over in silence any 
 reply which Hamilton should be pleased to make to my essay 
 of the 26th of December. The candour with which he is in- 
 clined to treat me, and the temperate style into which his com- 
 positien seems to have subsided,f are, however, sufiicient in- 
 
 * In controversies of every description, vvlien you are discoursing on, 
 one subject, it is a great fault to introduce another, — either to add that 
 which is extraneous, or to take away that which is essential. Above all, 
 you should be upon your guard, lest you change the whole drift and to- 
 pic of controversy : as was the case with Zethus and Amphion, who, 
 when they had began a discussion upon the subject of music, occupied 
 the whole of the dispute upon the rationality of wisdom and the utility 
 of virtue. 
 
 ■]• How different is the spirit with which he penned the IVth Number, 
 from that which he breathed in the Illd ! Who could suppose that a 
 person, apparently so inimical to all fustian, would publish a sentence 
 like the following ?— " They (the Presbyterians) have seen issuing from 
 your Church, in Great-Britain, Martyrs in Religion, Giants in Learning, 
 Apostles in Pioty, and Heroes in Christian Courage, mingling in the great 
 
70 
 
 "Sucements to- make me relinquish this -resolntion, and write a 
 Brief rejoinder to his IVth Number. Had Jjib stated with accu- 
 racy the positions which I endeavoured to establish, there would 
 hs no occasion to reiterate my arguments ; for the dispute would 
 then be fairly before the reader, and he might himself appre^ 
 eiate the merits of our exertions. As it is, however, I feel con- 
 strained to make my appearance once more on the arena, and to 
 rectify some strange misrepresentations which are contained in 
 Hamilton's address to me. 
 
 Im my first essay, it was attempted to be proved that the pre- 
 Hiittra, of the Phoenix Bank was not considered in the light of an 
 twdinary receipt into the treasury of the State ; — or, in other 
 words, that it was only deposited in the coffers of the common- 
 wealth for the purpose of appropriating it to the specific usea 
 designated in the petition for a Bank. 1 endeavoured to show 
 that the legislators did not conceive themselves at liberty to da 
 with that money exactly as they pleased. In order to this,J,! 
 •undertook to establish the absurdity of the contrary supposition, 
 fey putting a very natural construction upon the subsequent acts 
 of th«^ Legislature, If the members of the Assembly had con- 
 sidered the Bonus as composing a part of the monies devoted to 
 the general expenditure of the State, they certainly would have 
 employed it to relieve the commonwealth in those points where 
 the pressure of exigency was the heaviest. Such conductwould 
 have bieen not only the dictate of common sense, but the result 
 flf cogent necessity. What, then, at the time of receiving the 
 Bonus, was the item of expenditure, which required the. speedy 
 and' united revenues of the State ? '.To repeat a question con- 
 tained in m.y former number,-- rWas not every sinew of the State 
 andi every penny of the treasury in requisition for the defence ' 
 of OUT maritime frontier .'' But at this very necessitous con- 
 juncture, we find the Legislature appropriating no less than 
 4^20,000 to the Medical Department of Yale College. Was this 
 *he most efifeetuai mode of defending the sojl .^ Was this the 
 way in which the revenues of the State were converted, to the 
 protection of its inhabitants ? Would our grave legislators he 
 purchasing scalpella fo.r dissecting the bodies of Uaeir fellow-cit- 
 iaens, while they ought to be procuring instruments for the de- 
 
 and' terrible conflict with Anlicbrist and his followers, gnd Ijoldhy encoun- 
 reiing the embattled hosts of Infidelity and Illumi'nism, until the banner 
 of the Ci'oss waved in triumph bver their prostrate foeV."— "rherefc're, 
 Episcopalians, you have no business with the Bishop's Bonus. There is 
 certjiinly more real verbiage, in, this Number, than in all the others put • 
 together. He seems here to have eiFectually acquired the qualification 
 which Mentor ascribes to Calypso,— 17 a trouvi le moytn de parler long- 
 tems sdns rien dire,— that of being able to talk a long time without say- 
 ing any thing. " His reasons art* as two grains of wheat hiU in two 
 bushels of chaff; you- shall seek all day ere you find them ; and, when 
 you have found them, they are not'worth the search."— shak. 
 
71 
 
 fence of their lives ? Every tongue will be ready to pronounce 
 a' prompt and categorical negative to all these interrogations. — 
 The conduct of our legislators was therefore explicable only^ 
 upon the supposition that they considered the Phoenix premium 
 as set apart for specific purposes^ — as money which they couM 
 not conscientiously appropriate to th« defence of the common- 
 wealth. 
 
 Had I been as full on this point in my jirst essay as I have 
 been here, the bandbur of Hamilton would not perhaps have 
 permitted him so unaccountably to misrepresent the real import 
 of my reasoning. He has contrived, however, so to distort 
 my argument, as to make it a complete tissue of absurdity ;. 
 and with the privilege of the conqueror in such cases, has tri- 
 umphantly brought up the rear of his periods with a formidable 
 file of exclamation-points. — The above reasoning is thus ex- 
 hibited by a writer upon whom the mantle of Aliexander Ham- 
 ilton seems to have dropped : — " The conduct of the Legisla- 
 ture, in so often refusing to grant 1 0,000 dollars to the Bishop's 
 Fund, which to me appears such conclusive evidence, that 
 when they received the Bonus, they never meant to appropri- 
 ate any part of it in this way, (for their conduct is the 
 only possible evidence of their intentions.) you attempt 
 to explain, by supposing that as every sinew of the State 
 was then in requisition to support the war, they wished to keep 
 this money, to which they knew they had no right, for a few 
 yiears : of in other words, they resolved to have a compulsory 
 loan out of the Bishop's Fund, without even asking the trustees,, 
 of the enormous sum of 10,000 dollars, to carry on the war I" 
 The transcription of this sentence has been an effectual trial of 
 my patience ; for there never was, perhaps, a more illiberal at- 
 tempt at wit by an artful rhisrepresentation of another's mean- 
 ing. Such doublings to escape the force of an argument, are 
 very sinistrous omens to the cause which they are intended tO' 
 serve. The writer set oUt with the benevolent intention of rec- 
 tifying my mistakes; but 1 must be permitted to say, he has 
 committed twenty errors where he has corrected one. 
 
 In the mind of every impartial reader, my reasoning was, I 
 am sure, liable to no perversion ; — and I defy Hamilton to point, 
 out a single passage which can give any countenance to the con- 
 clusion he has deduced from it. In that part of my essay, 
 which he has thus misrepresented, there is not the remotest al- 
 lusion to the 10,000 dollars of the Bishop's Fund. I was then 
 combatting this writer upon his own ground,— and endeavouring 
 to prove, that if, as he pretended, the sum giv£n to the College 
 in our. city was not an appropriation of the Phoenix Bonus, but 
 a donation from th* treasury of the Stat«, it was unaccountable 
 how our legislators should, all at once, relax their gripe upon the 
 'public revenues, and begin to endow seminaries of learning, 
 
72 
 
 (sinee they had heretofore treated them with such niggardly pe- 
 nuriousness,) — and more especially at a time when the exigen- 
 cies of a belligerent state required every dollar of our scanty 
 funds. The only way, then, in which the conduct of the Gen- 
 eral Assembly could be reconciled with the dictates of common 
 sense, was to suppose that they considered the Phoenix Bonus, 
 not as a part of the legitimate revenues of the State, but as a 
 sum of money deposited in the vaults of the treasury for spe- 
 cific purposes, and, as such, incapable of being conscientiously 
 applied to any part of th§ governmental expenditure which they 
 might please to designate. 
 
 ft seems to be admitted on all hands, that at the very time of 
 the appropriation to the Medical Institution, the belligerent state 
 of the commonwealth had occasioned a pressing necessity of 
 money; and, indeed, Hamilton himself has told us, (page 11,) 
 " that the treasury was groaning under the expenses of the war." 
 If then pur Legislators considered the 20,000 dollars given to 
 the Medical College as a part of the funds of the State, did 
 they pay a very humane attention to the pecuniary " groans" of 
 the treasury, in thus converting this sum t© a purpose which, so 
 far from affording relief, only aggravated the evil .'' The solita- 
 ry evidence of a single individual cannot, I am persuaded, give 
 much valid support to my reasonings on this point ; but it is a 
 fact, that one of the leading members of the Assembly expres- 
 sed a wish, at the last session of the Legislature, that the re- 
 mainder of the Phoenix Bonus might be disposed of in some 
 way or other ; — a wish, permit me to add, which would never 
 escape the lips of a Yankee Legislator, in regard to the legit- 
 imate monies of the public revenue. Our coffers have never 
 been in the predicament of the Treasury of the United States 
 at the commencement of the Monticellian dynasty ; when Mr. 
 Jefferson was really at a loss to know whatsAowW he done with 
 the inconvenient superflux of national revenue. 
 
 The whole paragraph of Hamilton's IVth number, from which 
 I have made an extract, and indeed . almost all the subsequent 
 part of his essay, is built upon the fundamental misrepresenta- 
 tion which I have been endeavouring to expose. It is amusing 
 to see what an accumulation of falsities may be raised, by pi- 
 ling one mistake upon another — 
 
 "Hills over liills^.and Alps on Alps they rise." 
 
 Hamilton had undoubtedly very substantial motives for the 
 expedient he has adopted in attempting to ward off my argu- 
 ments on the subject we have been considering ; inasmuch as 
 an admission of their cogency, would completely deprive him 
 of the great topic upon which the resources of his- eloquence 
 have been heretofore expended. The chief, and in fact, we 
 may say, the only objection which has hitherto been urge* 
 
73 
 
 against the claim of the Episcopalians to the #10,0QP of the 
 Phoenix Bonus, is, that an admission of the claim, and conse- 
 quent payment of the money, would involve the awful legislative 
 sin of converting a part of the public revenues to the exclusive 
 benefit of one sect of Christians ! This is the Alpha and the 
 Omega of Hamilton's papers. At one time it struts in capi- 
 tals, — and at another, shrinks into italics, — is now hedged in with 
 exclamation points, — and now lurks under a parenthesis. Upon 
 whatever topic he may be discoursing, he is sure to terminate 
 in this ; — distantly imitating the elder Cato, (si parva licet com- 
 poncre magnis,) who, let what might be the subject before his 
 fellow-citizens, was always certain to finish his peroration by say- 
 ing, " 1 am also of opinion, that Carthage should be destroyed/' 
 
 Hut if the foregoing observations be correct, — if the Legisla- 
 ture did not consider the Phoenix Bonus as a legitimate portion 
 of public revenue, but as a sum destined for specific purposes, 
 and therefore with a label of "Noli me tangere" upon it, — the 
 inference is unavoidable, that an appropriation of 10,000 dollars 
 to the Fund of the Bishop, could not be " unlocking the public 
 treasury for the exclusive benefit of one sect of Christians." It 
 would not be unlocking the treasury at all. It would only be 
 the disposal of a sum deposited in the coffers of the state for 
 express and specific destination — an appropriation, in plain lan- 
 guage, of the Phoenix Premium. Yet a cry of religious favour- 
 itism — of making bare the legislative arm, to uphold a "secta- 
 rian faction" — "of exalting one ecclesiastical order above all 
 the rest, in point of privilege" — has been set up and continued 
 on this subject, from the beginning to the end of the controver- 
 sy. We must, therefore, give Hamilton the praise of self-con- 
 sistency. He has uniformly wielded the same weapon, and has al- 
 ways struck in the same place. If my arguments be well found- 
 ed, however, they must wrest this weapon out of his hand ; and 
 what topic of pulpit eloquence he will then resort to, can hardly 
 be determined. For the remainder of the subject will, in his 
 hands, be very awkward and unwieldy. To me it does appear, 
 that in relation to the Bishop's Fund, the members of the Gen- 
 eral Assembly considered themselves rather as the arbitrators for 
 an association of individuals, than as the Legislators of the 
 State of Connecticut. 
 
 But although we must allow Hamilton to be self-consistent in 
 constantly repeating the same topic of discourse ; yet his own 
 good sense might lead him to conclude, a priori, that the multi- 
 tude of remarks which he has brought to the subject, cannot all 
 be reconciled with each other. For every substantial purpose 
 of religion, all sects of Christians may be said to be upon the 
 same looting. With a little variation, we may adopt the lan- 
 guage of the political heresiarcli of Monticello — We are all 
 Presbyterians, and all Episcopalians : or, in the more applica- 
 K 
 
74 
 
 ble phr J|l)logy of HaniiUon himself—*' Have we not all, sub- 
 stantially, the same faith ? Have we not one Bible, one Atone- 
 ment, and one Saviour? And do we not look for one and the 
 same Htavni ?" Our interests are, therefore, identically con- 
 centrated to the same point : And will it be pretended, that 
 the assistance afTorded' to a part, is not conducive to the advan- 
 tage of the whole ? If we are all fellow-travellers in the same 
 path, will you refuse to help in removing the difficulties in tha 
 way of a part, lest they should thus be able to reach the place 
 of destination before you ? On this topic, however, I shall not 
 much insist. I advocate the claim of the petitioners for the 
 Bishop's Bonus, not as Episcopalians, but as men. 
 
 I come now to the second point in which my reasoning has 
 been misrepresented. It seems as if my whole essay came out 
 in a distorted and questionable shape, after passing through the 
 medium of Hamilton's mind. In my first article, I endeavoured 
 to show, by a variety of considerations, that the original peti- 
 tion for the Phcenix Bank, was not rejected upon the ground of 
 its being exceptionable in the clause relating to the, Bishop's 
 Bonus. If the reader will take the pains to look at what I have 
 said on this -subject, (see pamph. p. 35-6,) and then compare 
 it wit^ the representation in Hamilton's IVth number, (p. 67 — 
 6S,) he may see how an ingenious writer can contrive to slip out 
 from under the weight of an opponent's argument — or how a 
 dexterous fencer can parry a pass which is aimed at his vitals. 
 Oil this subject, spmething like the following train of thought 
 might be supposed to have passed through the mind of each of 
 .our Representatives :— Here is a petition fOr a new banking es- 
 tablishment, offering, as a condition to the grant, to distribute 
 $50,000 to the Medical and Academical Institutions of Yal^ 
 College, and to the Fund of the Bishop of Connecticut.— -Now, 
 for myself, I am not willing to vote for the petition in this form. 
 To grant, it in this shape, would, in my view, be giving to the 
 petitioners, not only a lucraitive institution for themselves, but a 
 power materially to assist other institutions ; a kind of patron- 
 age which ought not, I think, to be vested ih the hands of a pri- 
 vate association ; but to belong exclusively to the Government 
 of the State. What confirms me in this opinion,' is, that the 
 petition, in its present form, has not the signatures of but three 
 individuals ; and to such a small number, I will especially op- 
 pose the transference of a prerogative which is a part of our 
 own appropriate functions. I shall not vote, therefore, for the 
 petition in this form. Not that I have any objections to the ap- 
 propriations as specified in it — for what is it to me, bow the pe- 
 titioners choose that their money shall be disposed of .f" — but be- 
 cause I am jealous of my own rights, and tenacious of the pre- 
 rogatives of the Legislature. 
 
 A variety of other consideratioas on the same point, the rea!d- 
 
 
75 
 
 er will find in my first essay. I have selected this, b^use it is 
 the part most materially misrepresented. Listen, then, to the 
 construction -which Hamilton gives of reasoning similar to the 
 above. -r-" The same carelessness and inattention to the facts' 
 of the case, is thie foundation of your hypothesis, that the Legis- 
 lature refused to pass the petition in its exceptionable form, 
 merely because it would be derogatory to their dignity to suffer 
 " individuals under no authoritative association," to make the ap- 
 propriations suggested. In plainer language, here was a sort of 
 amicable contest, and the Legislature and the petitioners were 
 by the cat's, to know which should have the credit of distribut- 
 ing this 50,000 dollars, in the mode specified ; a mode which, 
 according to your idea, they b'oth agreed was the most judicious 
 and eligible ; and finally, the petitioners, as being the most niag- 
 nahirnous and courteous, yielded, as in duty bound, the point of 
 etiquette to their superiors j and then, their superiors, like a 
 pack of rogues, as they were, having got so large a sum into 
 their clutches, very coolly and honestly determined to cheat th6 
 true owners, and keep it all to themselves." ' 
 
 Here he watVes his goose-quill " in triumph over his prostrate 
 foe," arid assails me, as usual,, with a rank off exclamation points. 
 The reader will not find in my article, the remotest countenance 
 for the conclusion respecting the " amicable contest here men- 
 tioned, nor any thing which warrants the inference, that our Le- 
 gislators are " swindlers"' and " rogues." And are you ready to 
 contend, Hamilton, that every censure upon the proceedings of 
 the Legislature, amounts to an imputation of roguery.? Have 
 you' relinquished your disbelief " in Legislative infallibility r" — 
 Have you forgot that men "may be wheedled into measures.''" 
 Have you changed your opinion «?» one little month, and are not 
 willing that they should now avail themselves of the palliatives 
 which you formerly gave them on account of their natural fallibif- 
 ify.'' Do you remeiBper to have ever said, "you- did not believe 
 that a Connecticut Legislature was ever knowingly and icilfuUy 
 guilty of corruption or oppression ?" And will you now deny 
 me the privilege of adopting the same language .'' 
 
 Having finished this division of the subject, I will, proceed 
 next to examine an argument upon which much stress has been 
 laid by Hamilton, and which, therefore, cannot be suffered to re- 
 main unnoticed. According to him, the repeated refusal of the 
 Legislature to deliver the 10,000 dollars to the trustees of the 
 Bishop's Fund, " is ccndiisire evidence that when they received 
 the Bonus, they never intended to appropriate any part ,of it in 
 this way." P. 60. In order to settle this question, I beg leave 
 to introduce here an analogous case, which came before the 
 late Superior Court. It seems that a gentleman in this State 
 married a lady who lost a first husband in Maryland; and,, after 
 her decease, promised to her only suiviviBg child, the personal 
 
76 
 
 propertjfef her' former husbancj, Subsequently, however, he 
 was wrofet upon to believe that the performance af his prom- 
 ise might involve him in some difficulty ; and he accordingly re- 
 pelled the importunities of his son-in-law, by a resolute refusal 
 to deliver up the property. As the young man's patience was 
 not absolutely inexhaustible, he brought a suit against his father- 
 in-law, and compelled him into the performance of his pronaise, 
 But, according to Hamilton's interpretation, the court and jury 
 were verv egregiously mistaken in their decision on this point — 
 the refusal of the defendant to give up the property, was " such 
 conclusive evidence," that when he made the promise, he never 
 intended to perform it ! And are we then to believe, that men 
 never change their minds ? That what were their intentions in 
 time past, are conclusively inferrable from their subsequent beha- 
 viour f 
 
 The conduct of the Legislature is precisely analogous to the case 
 of the father-in-law above mentioned. When they first receiv- 
 ed the Phoenix Bonus, there was not, perhaps, a doubt on the 
 mind of any person, that they would withhold the portion des- 
 tined for the Bishop's Fund. By subsequent management, how- 
 ever, they were wheedled out of their previous intentions, and 
 determined to refuse the Episcopalians their portion of the Bo- 
 nus. There is no occasion to suppose, here, that our Legisla- 
 tors are swindlers, or rogues; but if they have been unwittingly 
 led to adopt an unjust course of measures, are we to be called 
 clamorous factionists and sectarian fanatics, because we have at- 
 tempted to bring them back to their, former rectitude .'' Are we 
 to be considered as accusing them of downright villainy, because 
 we have endeavoured to expose a slight declination from duty?* 
 According to the legerdemain by which Hamilton has man- 
 aged my " letters of the alphabet," they do not, I confess, 
 throw much light on the argument. With precisely the spirit 
 
 * It seems as if Hamilton had misteuk tlie whole aim and object of my 
 first paper. In a note (p. 70.) he has contrived to make me the ot'i°;inal as- 
 (serter of a proposition which I formerly drew ex absurdo from his mode 
 of interpreting the acts of the Legislature. "I think (says he) that tha 
 Legislature did imprudently in receiving the Bonus at all; bui not with 
 Lokmah, that Ihey very nearly approximaled to corruption." Nothing can 
 be at a greater distance from the construction I put upon the conduct of 
 the General Assembly. If the reader recollects any thing of my first 
 number, he need not certainly be told, that I was there endeavouring tu 
 disprove the suppositions of Hamilton, by showing the absurdities which 
 they invobfed ; and, among other tilings, I drew the inference from his 
 reasomng'^ that the Legislature had been guilty of something which /ooiteii 
 like corruption. For this conclusion, he is clearly responsible. This im- 
 putation, which his argument necessarily brought upon our Legislators, 
 was made the very ground upon which I was induced to reject his repre- 
 sentation of the matter. So far from thinking the Legislators had actual- 
 ly " approximated to corruption," I scouted the idea of their having cum- 
 icnitted so aggravated a misdemeanour. See p. S4. 
 
7T 
 
 of a sinking man who catches at a straw, he has taken ad\T(n- 
 tage of an immaterial difference between the actual state of the 
 facts, and the fictitious case of my invention, to bring rididule 
 upon the whole device. Had that writer attended more than 
 he seems to have done, to the liberal rule which is laid down'by 
 Tully, in regard to legitimate analogies, he would not have 
 rambled over two pages of wild conclusions which have very 
 little relevancy to the-question. " JVon res tota toti rei necesss 
 est similia sit, (says Cicero, Ad Heren. lib. iv.j scd ad ipsum, 
 ad quod conferetur, similitudinem kabeat oportet," — It is not ne- 
 cessary that the two cases should coincide in every particular, 
 but that they should be similar in those points for which they 
 were expressly introduced. Now, according to my disposition 
 of the letters, the petitioner for the bank, and not E, the Trus- 
 tee of the Bishop's Fund, was made to expostulate with his 
 Majesty on account of his refusal to complete the appropriation 
 as he had begun it. Can it make any difference who is the 
 complainant, provided the person complained of be guilty .' 
 All the meftibers of the community, — not E only, but every 
 letter in the Alphabet, — might with equal propriety cry out a- 
 gainst the injustice of his Royal Highness. I was myself a- 
 ware, at the time of writing that article, of the dissimilarity 
 pointed out by Hamilton ; but I did not think he would have 
 made it a ground of discarding and ridiculing the whole con- 
 trivance. If a part of the Bonus was claimable at all from his 
 Majesty, could it make any alteration, in point of right, wheth- 
 er the demand was pre/erred by E, or by the original petioner 
 for the Bank ? 
 
 Much has been said by Hamilton of the contrast between the 
 conduct of the Corporation of Yale College^ and that of the 
 Trustees of the Bishop's Fund. He asks the Episcopalians 
 very triumphantly, why they do not imitate the meek spirit of 
 uncomplaining patience which has always been exhibited by 
 the President and Fellows of our College ? If the Corpora- 
 tion supposed that their claim to f 20,000 was well founded, 
 think you they would be so long silent on the subject .-' Accord- 
 ing to this writer, they have not yet learnt the method^ of " in- 
 sulting the Legislature" by impudently ^urging a claim which 
 they know to be unfounded, — You, Hamilton, who seem to 
 have been privy to the occurrences behind the scene, ought to 
 tread very lightly on this ground. There is a very satisfactory 
 reason for the silence of the College Corporation On this sub- 
 ject. When the Phuenix Bonus shall have mingled and co- 
 alesced with the legitimate funds of the State, — when the Epis- 
 copalians shall have ceased to utter a just complaint, because they 
 see no prospect of its being listened to, — when, in short, the 
 whole transaction respecting the Phoenix Bank shall have sunk 
 into forgetfuhiess, and tlie very name of BONUS be heard no 
 
78 
 
 more -at all,— I shall be egregiously disappointed, if a Jo m- 
 tiori'Hrom the State does not remunerate the stillness which has 
 been preserved within the walls of Yale College. _ It will be 
 then impossible for the Episcopalians to claim a similar treat- 
 ment at the hands of their Representatives. They cannot then 
 " insult the Legislature" by daring.to demand their dues ;— and 
 when they have once shut their mouths upon the subject, the 
 Bonus may be disposed of as will best suit the pleasures of our 
 Representatives, or most conduce to the advantage of the good 
 -old cause. The Corporation of Yale College have not ahoai/t 
 been so peaceful as they are now. Why did they once unite 
 with the Episcopalians in a prayer for the appropriation of 
 the Bonus .'' and, after thus asserting their claim, what Legisla- 
 tive magic has spell-bound them in the arms of unresisting si- 
 lence .'' 
 
 I have now finished what little I had to say at this ti«i« on the 
 long-agitated subject of the, PhcBnix Boniis • and, as mj^ scanty 
 stock of thought is now exhaustied, I hope the future misrepre-' 
 sentations of my antagonists will not compel me again to en- 
 gage in the field of dispute, I did not enter the lists to cover the 
 Legislature with obloquy, or " to shake my censorial rod over 
 their heads." I entertain no ill will, either against them, or a- 
 gainst the writer who has made such awkward work in endeav- 
 oring to rectify my mistakes. He has generally treated rae witlf 
 candour, — and I hope I have reciprocated bis civility. 
 
 LOKMiVN. 
 
 ERRATA. , 
 
 THERE are some very material typographical mistakes in the re- 
 jjublicatioo of my first articlq. In the prayer which I put into the mouth 
 of the fictitious petitioner, the latter clause stood in the news-paper : — 
 ^' Bis Majesty would be graciously pleased to distribute the bonus ac- 
 cording to the original understanding of his Royal Highness and his 
 humble petitioner ;" that is, according to the mutual agreement between 
 •the tivo. In the republication, however, this meaning is entirely- des- 
 troyed by placing a simi-c^Jondireptly after the word "his Royal High-, 
 ness," thus : — " according to the original understanding of his Royal 
 Highness; and your humble petitioner," ke. ; that is, "and your peti- 
 tioner will ever pray," &,c.— It will be seen at once to make cemplete 
 nonsense of the passage. 
 
 Again : iln the last sentence of my first number^ by substituting the 
 word "formally" (oT th,e word "formalitif," a like perversion of mean- 
 ing has been occasioned. As it now stands, the passage would seem to 
 refer to the petition of the Trustees of the Bishop's Fund ; whereas, in. 
 the original, it had reference to the motives of the Legislature in refus- 
 ing to grHiit thie prayer of ttie petitioners for a Bank. By comparing the, 
 sentence thus reprinted with the one in the news-paper, the accuracy of 
 tMs remark will fully appear. 
 
 LOKMAN. 
 
79 
 
 No. XVII. 
 Medical Institution of Yale College. 
 
 A PROFOUND writer on the Wealth of Nations, Adam? 
 Smith, in his article on the " expense of institutions for the eda- 
 eation of youth," says, that " Whatever fgrces a certain number 
 of students to any College or Univeriity, independent of the merit 
 or reputation of the Teachers, tends more or less to diminish the 
 necessity of that merit or reputation." 
 
 Merit in the instructors, on which durable reputation is found- 
 ed, should be the great object of Legislative measures to pro- 
 mote the utility of a .literary institution. When the officers are 
 meritorious, the students will be more diligent, more inclined to 
 study, more happy in their employment, and they will be more 
 thoroughly and successfully taught- When the State compels 
 students to study at the Meijicat Institution, before they can 
 practise Physic, or compels them to incur greater expense by 
 attending lectures E^t Institutions in other States; such a law di- 
 minishes the necessity of equal merit in, our Medical Professors ; 
 and less m-erit in the officers would be necessary, if the scholars 
 were forced to study at this institution ; and not allowed the 
 privilege, at greater expense, to study at some public institution 
 in a neighbouring State. If no liberal education can be acquir- 
 ed, which liberal education should be made by law or custom, 
 necessary to preaching in the pulpit, or pleading at the bar, or 
 'practising physic, except at Yale College, or at some literary in- 
 stitution, in another State, where the expenses would be increas- 
 ed ; it is evident'that a less degree of merit in the officers of Yale 
 College would be sufficient to draw the same number of students 
 to that seminary, than would be requisite without the operation 
 of such a law and such a custom ; and that the merit of these 
 officers would diminish in proportion to the force'of that law or 
 custom. 
 
 " Every medical student, (says the law establishing the Med- 
 ical Institution,) who shall commence the study of Physic or 
 Surgery, after the foregoing articles shall be complied with, 
 and lectures commence upon the several branches above men- 
 tioned, shall attend one course of each of the above systems of 
 lectures, undkk the Paorr.ssoRS of the Medical Institu- 
 tion OF Yale College, or some other public Medical Institution, 
 previous to an examination for a license." There being no other 
 public Medical Institution in this State, except the Medical Insti- 
 tution of Yale College, students by the operation of this law are 
 not at liberty, however well qualified, to be examined for a li- 
 cense to practice physic, unless they have studied one term un- 
 der these test professors, or are driven out of the State with 
 much greater expense. 
 
80 
 
 These medical professors of the Saybrook Platform creed, 
 have then no competition with individual practitioners of phys- 
 ic, however eminent, to obtain students. They have also no 
 stimulus arising from the merit of Episcopal practitioners, as to 
 holding their own ofEces ; for Yale College has established her 
 creed, excluding Episcopal professors from the Medical Institu- 
 tion. 
 
 The treasurer and prudential committee of Yale College 
 manage the fiscal and prudential concerns of the Medical In- 
 stitution ; and no vote is valid in that Institution without the con- 
 sent ofthe president of the mother institution. 
 
 Are there not many physicians in the State as capable of in- 
 structing their pupils in physic and surgery, and qualifying them 
 for a license .' It would be invidious to give the names of a 
 great number of physicians, equal in capacity and experience 
 with the religious medical professors of the Medical Institution. 
 Nor must any physician, if he happens to be a Churchman, 
 ever become a professor of that Institution. No, nor will he 
 ever, we believe, receive its honours, if we judge from the 
 practise of Yale College. There may be a solitary case of such 
 an honour, in the course of a century, .^eing conferred on a 
 Churchman ; but Yale College knows well her men, and their 
 religion, before her pleasure crowns them with her honours. 
 
 Such are the clogs, imposed by law, upon the merit of both 
 instructors and students in physic and surgery, in this State. 
 As the circle of competition is lessened, so is the necessity of 
 qualification in the teachers and learners diminished ; and if 
 the necessity, the reality of merit or of reputation, in the same 
 ratio, will be diminished* 
 
 In one of the learned professions, then, no person can legally 
 employ his talents, in our State, unless he be admitted by tot 
 officers, into the religious Medical Institution, and there remain 
 under the instruction ofthe same test officers, during one term ; un- 
 less he be there examneabyanequal number of these testo&cers, 
 with those ofthe Medical Society, (which society is already nearly 
 extinct,) for a license legally to charge and collect fees for his 
 services. Nor can this person, thus hampered by the Saybrook 
 Platform creed, ever obtain tbe honour of a degree in his pro- 
 fession, or a doctorate, without studying two courses at this 
 medical, or some other public medical institution, " where a 
 similar course of public instruction is pursued ;" without obtain- 
 ing the signature of the president of Yale College, who is com- 
 pelled by the law of said College, to subscribe and publicly to 
 read the same Saybrook Platform creed or test of faith ; nor 
 without paying the said president of Yale College a gratuity of 
 four dollars for the above said degree of Doctor of Medicine, three 
 dollars to each of the examining committee, and ten dollar? 
 to the Medical Society. See 8th article of the above recited 
 
81 
 
 law. The 9th article provides for honorary degrees being con- 
 ferred by the president, at the recommendation of the Medi- 
 cal Convention. 
 
 But this body being on the verge of dissoliition, sudh a pro- 
 vision must soon be inoperative. In the language of a venera- 
 ble member of the Medical Convention, " by a union with Yale 
 College, the Medical Society has committed suicide." 
 
 They have been wheedled and squeezed and fraternized out 
 of their existence. And when this work of love is finished, 
 the flourish about the nomination of officers of the Medical In- 
 stitution, being an equal degree in the Medical Convention, will 
 ■be daly appreciated ; and then, we think, no man can be found 
 who will deny that one of the learned professions is under the 
 control, of a religious denomination in the State of Connecticut ; 
 and that the Saybrook Platform creed is now as much the estab- 
 lished religion, for this profession, as it was from the year 170S 
 to our independence in 1784#The third paragraph of this law 
 proceeds : " Be it further enacted, That so much of the act, 
 •entitled. An Act to incorporate a Medical Societ)-, as respects the 
 appointing of county committees for the exaTiunatioti of med- 
 ical students, and the granting of licenses to them, and that so 
 much of the act as respects the granting of honorary degrees, be, 
 and the same is hereby repealed." Then, do let us ask, what is 
 left to the Medical Society .'' The examination of medical stu- 
 dents for licenses to practise, and the granting of honorary de- 
 grees, belong to Yale College, and to the Medical Institution, and 
 to a strange sort of nominal, joint, pretended, body of Physi- 
 cians, orice incorporated by the State, under the title of Medical 
 Society. Can the Medical Society, however, examine students.' 
 No. Can they grant licenses .'' No. Can they grant honorary 
 degrees in Medicine .'' No. The law continues, twelfth article : 
 " All persons licensed m future to practise physic or surgery, 
 agreeably to the foregoing provisions, shall be of course mem- 
 bers of the Medical Society, in the respective counties where 
 they reside." And how long wiH it be, before every member of 
 the Medical Society, if it sboidd exist, will have studied and been 
 licensed by the religious Medical Institution ': A very few years. 
 There will then be no member of the Medical Society who has 
 not been subject to the effect and power of these Medical test 
 Professors of the Medical Institution. No practitioner of phys- 
 ic, no student in medicine, no doctorate conferred, in physic or 
 surgery, in the State of Connecticut, without the pleasure of 
 these test officers. 
 
 It is complained of by " Hamilton," that Episcopacy compel- 
 led Schoolmasters and Divines in England, to subscribe to the 
 39 articles ; although, from 1708 to our independence, the Say- 
 brook Platform was in this State the established reVi^wn in mal- 
 stei's of faith and government. But he now triumphs in the esi- 
 
8^ 
 
 ciusion from practice of all physicians who do not study undeir 
 the Saybrook Platform professors ; and in the exclusion from the 
 ' honours of their profession, of all those who have not studied two 
 courses under these professors, and obtained the signature of 
 the President of Yale College J This is ZifieraZ conduct, "among 
 fepublicans, whose first principle it is, says Hamilton, that no 
 religion Is to be imposed upon us by goyernment, or to draw to 
 its aid the revenues of the State!" 
 
 This writer is much vexed, because Toleration says that " the 
 Literary Institutions of the State s.re favouring^ Presbyterianispi-" 
 Yes, yes, they not only favour Presbyterianism, but, from the 
 ^existence of these laws, they favour the indolence and want of 
 merit of the professors and pupils, in one literary profession. 
 
 We pronounce to be odious, these clogs upon merit, and this 
 religious establishment, in the Medical Institution. 
 
 ^'Let us cherish this seminary of Physicians, so useful to all 
 sects," Sic. utters Hamilton, To all sects ! to one sect ! It 
 is as destructive to mei;it in science, as to a fair toleration in 
 religion. The Assembly, we trust, will abolish these test laws, 
 thus detrimental to merit, and to " the free exercise of religion." 
 Are not these laws opposed to the spirit of the Toleration Act ? 
 Do they not OToZflie the Constitution of the United States.'' It is a 
 solemn inquiry ; Let it be as solemnly invesigated. 
 
 These laws were enacted in 1810; not in 1 708, as in the case 
 of Yale College, when the Saybrook Platform was professedly 
 the established religion. They have been enacted by the influ- 
 «nce of Yale College, to keep down Churchmen. Toleration 
 indeed, in a certain sense, will suffer Churchmen to live upon 
 bread ^nd water, as in Turkey. But this cannot be toleration 
 in a Republic : nor is it pretended that such a toleration would 
 be agreeable to the views of any Congregationalist. Then, gen- 
 tlemen of the Assembly, annul the odious provisions of this law, 
 and allow to other denominations &full toleration. We address 
 you with earnestness to do away these invidious distinctions. 
 No such laws are wanted by Churchmen. They wish to com- 
 pel no man, before he can pursue a learned profession, to study 
 with, or be examined by. Episcopal professors. Such compul- 
 sion is not consistent with a liberal toleration. \ 
 
 " Whatever forces a certain number of students to any 
 College or University, independent of the merit or reputation 
 of the teachers, tends more or less to diminish the necessity of 
 that merit or reputation." And since these laws of the State 
 force students to the Medical Institution of Yale College, they 
 diminish the necessity of the merit or reputation of its officers 
 and students. And since there is an intimate connection with 
 jthe Mother College, the same maxim of this great man applies 
 ivith force to the officers and students of Yale College. 
 
 TOLER.ATION. 
 
S3 
 
 No. XVIII. 
 
 Episcopacy as liberal* ns Presbyterianism. 
 
 TO show the reasonableness and necessity of the ordinatioB 
 of ministers in the Christian Church, the following extracts from 
 an English writer will be read with interest, as bearing on the 
 subject. 
 
 " This rite (viz. ordination) has, by every true son of the 
 Church of England, been at all times considered as of the high- 
 est importance; as an ordinance, indeed, of Christ, through the 
 medium of the Holy Ghost, as laying men under the most sa- 
 cred obligations,- Except among the Independents, who sprung 
 up under Cromwell, it never entered into the head of any man, 
 calling himself a Christian, to suppose that the ordination of the 
 clergy is a useless ceremony,'until it became fashionable to con- 
 found the religion of Christ with >hat Philosophers call the re- 
 ligion of nature." 
 
 " Were Christianity nothing bul a system of ethics founded 
 on the relation which subsists between God as the Creator and 
 Governor of the world, and man as a rational creature, it 
 would indeed be ridiculous to inquire by what form, or what 
 authority, the clergy are ordained j because, in that case, the dlest 
 moralist, whether ordained or not, would, of course, be the 
 ablest and most useful minister. But if Christianity be, as it 
 certainly is, an instituted religion, founded on the means employ- 
 ed by God to restore to mankind that immortality which all ha(^ 
 forfeited by the sin of Adam ; and if immortality be not now, 
 nor ever was the right of ma,n, either as inherent in his nature, 
 or as the reward of moral virtue, (and this is the dictate of sober 
 philosophy as well of the gospel,) it follows that immortality, if 
 conferred upon man, must be conferred as a "free, gift'^ upon 
 such tonditions as seemed best to the all-wise Giver. But the 
 rites of a religion founded on a free gift must derive all the val- 
 ue, and the ministers of that religion all their authority, not 
 from the relations of nature, but from the positive appointment 
 of the Author of the gift; and he who maintains that any man, 
 !fvho is qualified by knowledge, may act as a minister of the gos- 
 pel, though he be not ordained, must, to be consistent, claim to 
 himself immortality, not as " the gift of God through Jesus 
 Christ our Lord," but either as the inherent right of his nature, 
 of which he cannot be deprived, or as a debt due by God to his 
 merit, 
 
 • We have used this term because of the sneer of Hamilton against the 
 Divine right of Bishops, in the second sentence of his i5ist piece.' See 
 page lOtb, No. 2. He could refrain no longer from attacking Episcopacy. 
 
 Pdb. 
 
84 
 
 " Such arrogant claims are in direct opposition as well to tBe- 
 letter as to the spirit of the Gospel; and, therefore he who has 
 read the New Testament with any degree of mtelhgence, and 
 believes it to be a revelation from heaven, must, be convmced 
 that from it only he can learn who they are who have authority 
 from Christ to preach the word, and to administier the ordinan- 
 ces of his rehgion." , „. . 
 
 The Congregationalists, in the Platform of Church Disci* 
 pline presented to the Churches and General Court, anno 1648, 
 at Cambridge, and approved in 1679 by the Synod, and in 1680 
 by the Assembly at Boston, admit, that " where there are no El- 
 ders, (or ministers,) imposition of hands may be performed by 
 the Brethren, orderly chosen by the church- thereunto ;" that 
 " ordination doth not constitute an officer, nor give him the 
 essentials- of his office ;" but they also- say, that if the 
 church- so desire, we see not why imposition of hands may not 
 be performed by the Elders of other Churches ; " page 36 of 
 the edition of 1808^ Churclf officers are not only to be chosen 
 by the church, but ordained by the imposition of hands, and 
 prayer ; with which, at the ordination of Elders, fasting also is 
 to be joined." Whether these Christians were IndependentSj 
 is not known to the writer. They however held, that the 
 " church had power to choose their officers and ministers, and, 
 in case of manifest unworthiness and delinquency, to depose 
 them; for (say they) to open and shut, to choose and refuse,_to 
 constitute in office, and remove from office, are acts belonging 
 to the same power." But that they viewed with reverence the 
 ordination of their officers, (although they allowed of laying on 
 ef hands by the Brethren, or of lay-ordination, and although the 
 Brethren- could depose the officers of their oivn ordination,) i»- 
 proved hy their fasting and prayer, previous to the ceremony. — 
 Also, in the 28th chapter, they declare; that " there be only two 
 sacraments ordained' by Christ our Lord in the Gosspelj that is 
 to say, Baptism and the Lord's Supper ; neither of which may 
 be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the word ImafuUy cal- 
 led." And of the Lord's Supper, ita the 30th chapter, they say, 
 that "the Lord Jiesus hath in this ordinance appointed his min- 
 isters to declare his word of institution- to the people, to pray 
 and hless the elements of bread and wine,, and thereby to set 
 them apart from a common to unholy «se,"'&c. 
 
 Then it appears, from the Cambridge Platform-, that although 
 the Brethren had the authority to ordain ministers, yet ordain- 
 ed ministers were necessary to the due administration of the 
 Sacraments in the church. 
 
 The Saybrook Platform is silent with respect to lay-ordina- 
 tion, unless it is recognized in the 12th page, in an extract from 
 Trumbull's History of Connecticut, where he says, that " the 
 Cambridge Platform, for 60 years, had been the general plan of 
 
85 
 
 discipline and church fellowship in New-England." We have 
 lieard of ordination by the Brethren at Stratford ; but that might 
 have been previous to the estabhshment by the Assembly, of 
 the Saybrook Platform. The same extracts relating to the sa- 
 craments coming from both platforms, we of course concludcj 
 that ordinations^ since that period, have been performed by the 
 Clergy, and not by the Brethren ; and that this rite is esteemed 
 as " constituting an officer, and giving him the essentials of his 
 office." For he cannot duly administer the sacraments without 
 this rite, nor be settled in a congregation^ And it may be added, 
 that the same words are found in the 27th and 29th chapters of 
 -" the Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, and the DiRECTORr 
 for the Worship of God, together with the Ran of Government 
 and Discipline of the Presbyterian Church of the United 
 States." 
 
 We are at a loss as to the fact, whether a union has taken- 
 place between the Congregationalists in New-England, and 
 «he Presbyterians, respecting church government. In matters of 
 faith, they have the same confession ; viz, the Westminister, 
 It is believed that the Congregationalists have a seat in the Gen- 
 eral Assembly of the Presbyterians, strictly so called. But 
 whether the Saybrook and Cambridge fosms of church govern- 
 ment are abolished by Congregationalists, and a close union 
 with Presbyterians has been established ; or, whether Congre- 
 gationalists sit in their General Assembly by courtesy, for 
 mutual harmony, or nght, is unknown to us. 
 
 Nor do we know whether the Saybrook Platform, in relation 
 to either church government or to doctrine, is the standard for 
 the Congregationalists in this State. The frequent alterations 
 of recent date, made by particular churches in their creeds, 
 holds out an entire independency on any general standard of faith. 
 But if Congregationalism and Independency are swallowed 
 up in Presbyterianism, this latter mode of church govern- 
 ment is as precise, definite and full, on the subject of ordmatiou, 
 as is Episcopacy ; and this will appear from their " mode of 
 ordination," page 374 of the edition of 1815, printed at Phi- 
 ladelphia. " Then the presiding Bishop* shall, by ^royer and 
 theioytwgon of hands of the Presbytery, according to the Apos- 
 tolic example, solemnly ordain him to the holy office of the 
 gospel ministry." And at page 3S2 it says, that " the Church 
 session consists of the minister or ministers and Elders of a 
 particular congregation ; of whom three Elders, if there be 
 
 * Notn to page 346, of the Presbyterian Directory. « As the office 
 and character of a gospel minister is particularly and fully described in 
 the Scriptures, under the title of Bishop ; and as this term is peculiarly 
 expressive of his duty a!( overseer of the flock, it ought not to be re- 
 ieeted." 
 
86 
 
 that number in the congregatiion, with the minister, shall be. a 
 quorum to do business. The church session is conopetent to 
 the spiritual government of the congregation." And from these 
 extracts, it is manifest that the powers of ordination and of 
 church government are takeii from the Brethren (the Elders 
 being ruling Elders) by the Presbyterian form of church gov- 
 ernment, as well as by the Episcopal ; and that ordinations are 
 held to convey spiritual authority by " laying on of bands" 
 by the Presbytery, in one Church; and, in the Episcopal Church, 
 by " laying on of the hands" of the Bishop. The Bishop is con- 
 sidered by Presbyterians as only a presiding officer among the 
 Elders or Ministers or Presbyters, who ordain and govern ; and 
 the Bishop is considered by Episcopalians as constituting a third 
 order among the Clergy, possessing alone- the powers of ordi- 
 nation and government in the Church. And, says Doctor 
 Miller, at page 347. of his first volume, it is only so far as any 
 6UGcession flows through the line of Presbyters, that " ordina- 
 tion" " is eJtlwsr regular or valid.. It is the laying on of hands 
 of the Presbytery, that constitutes a spiritual ordination | and 
 it is because Episcc^al Bishops are Presbyters, and assisted in 
 all ordinations by other Presbyters, that we consider their or- 
 daining acts, on the principles of scripture and primitive usage, 
 as valid." 
 
 But from other passages, it is evident that Doctor Miller 
 does not hold to the necessity of an uninterrupted succession 
 in the ministry from the Apostles, as do Doctor Mason of New^ 
 .York, President Stiles,* and the generality of Presbyterians. 
 The Presbyterians hold to an uninterrupted succession through 
 ■Presbyters ; and the Episcopalians, through Bishops, in their 
 sense ef that term, viz. as a third and superior order of ministers. 
 The Presbyterians believe in the equality of the ministry ; the 
 Episcopalians, in the superiority of the ordaining and govern^ 
 ing power, which, say they, was in the Apestles, and their suc- 
 cessors, whose successors are Bishops, and not Presbyters. — 
 Both believe in the divine right of the ministry. Presbyterians 
 'declaim against Bishops in the Episcopal sense, as of human 
 invention — as Prelatical, Arminian, and corrupt, and not to be 
 found in scripture. Episcopalians say, that ordination by Pres- 
 
 " The ministry, (says President Stiles,) is not of men, but of Christ 
 The Christian Priesthood, as well asthnt of Moses, was from heaven ; and 
 this not only in then' first institution, but in their subsequent transmis- 
 sion. The one was limited to the family of Aaron ; the other, confined 
 to no family or nation, was to perpetuate its own succession, by select- 
 ing from among Jews and Gentiles, persons of approved abilities and 
 piety, and separating them to this holy office by the laying on of the 
 hands, of the presbytery. This succession, has thus actually taken place 
 in the Christian Church in general, from the apostolic age to this day." 
 (Ordin. Serm. N. L. p. 4. 5.) 
 
87 
 
 byters, in the Presbyterian sense of that term, is not to be 
 found in scripture ; that it is a human contrivance to usurp the 
 powers of the Bishop ; that Presbyters have no legal govem- 
 nient in the Church ; and that their ordinations are invalid, — 
 So that, on the score of Charity, they are equally rigid in de- 
 nouncing each other, and equally full in the belief of the di- 
 vine right of the Presbytery, and of the divine right of the 
 Bishop. 
 
 According to Doctor Miller, the ordination of deacons, (who, 
 in the system of Episcopacy, are the lowest order of Clergy,) is 
 rendered null and void, b,eGause the Bishop alone ordains them, 
 without assistance from Presbyters or Priests ; who join him in 
 laying on of hands upon a Priest or Presbyter. In the Greek 
 Church, which is the established religion in Russia, the Bishop 
 alone ordains both Presbyters and Deacons. That Church, 
 then, of course, is unchurched, in the Presbyterian view of a 
 valid ordination. Having no lawful ministry, their administra- 
 tion of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, must be without effica- 
 cy in this large portion of Europe. Doctor How, in his volume, 
 referred to in our concluding number, has endeavoured to prove, 
 that in the Latin Church, the Bishop alone ordained, until the 
 Council of Carthage, in the fourthcentury ; and if he has been 
 successful in establishing this fact, it follows, since the succes- 
 sion in the ministry must be uninterrupted, that Presbytery, if 
 consistent, unchurches every Christian Church on this globe, 
 except that wbith Doctor Buchanan proves to exist in Asia. 
 Her own authority to administer the sacraments is derived 
 through the Latin Church ; and through the same channel is de- 
 rived the authority of the Episcopal Church. 
 ' Episcopacy unchurches the Presbyterians in Europe and A- 
 merica. And both Presbytery and Episcopacy unchurch the 
 Q,tlakers, who believe that the sacraments are not to be continu- 
 ed in the Church, and ought to be viewed, where baptism and 
 the eucharist are spoken of in Scripture, as metaphorical ex- 
 pressions and allegories. 
 
 From the principles maintained in the standards of Congre- 
 gationalists, Presbyterians and Episcopalians, and in the Books 
 of their respective writers, such then are the logical inferences 
 .relating to the chanty which each enteitains towards the other 
 denomniatiofis. But in practice, we conceive, that Episcopal- 
 ians have more charity f6r other denominations, than have Pres- 
 byterians or Congregationalists, Episcopalians do not excommu- 
 nicate their members for leaving their communion, and joining 
 any other communion. They freely admit to the sacrament of 
 the Lord's Supper, members in regular standing, of the Presby- 
 terian or Cpiigregational churches. And it is believed that, for 
 a, century, no person has been excommunicated, in England or 
 America, for any crime, whatever may be its enormity. They 
 
S8 
 
 are forbidden to partake of the elements ; they are admonished, 
 and perhaps threatened with the execution of this tremendous 
 sentence ; but this punishment has not been inflicted. They 
 are left with their Judge and Avenger in another world. Jesus 
 will pronounce, and execute sentence, at the general judgment. 
 
 It will not be denied that Congregation alists, in this State, have 
 eften excommunicated/their members for leaving theirj commu- 
 nion, and joining the Episcopal communion, without any charge 
 of immorality, or being punished with any other evidence of 
 their irregular standing, or want of reputation, than that of join- 
 ing the Episcopal communion. Nor will it be said that this is 
 ixot the recent practice of many Presbyterian Churches in Con- 
 necticut. 
 
 And for our present purpose, we will pursae this inquiry no 
 further ; it being palpable, that Presbyterians lay as much stress 
 ■upon valid ordinations, as Episcopalians ;— and that both treat 
 this rite as necessary to the valid administration of the Sacra- 
 ments. 
 
 Which mode is most accordant with scripture, we shall not 
 attempt to give an opinion. Nor is it important, in this discus- 
 sion, which, in point of fact, is to be found in the scriptures. 
 Both are to be tolerated, in this State, whether one denomin- 
 ation is raore or less tolerant or charitable than the other ; or 
 whether both systems of church government agree or disagree 
 with the word of God. 
 
 We have already shown, m our number beaded Seabury Col- 
 lege, that the Saybrook Platform recognizes the divine right of 
 a particulaT chMuch, the divine right of a deacon, and the divine 
 right of a minister ; which proves, that Congregationalists do 
 not differ from Presbyterians and Episcopalians, in their divine 
 right of the Presbytery, or divine right of the Bishop. The 
 governmental part of the 39 articles, it must follow, are as charita- 
 ble as the governmental part of the Saybrook Platform, and the 
 Presbyterian Directory^ and the doctrinal part of the 39 articles 
 are expressly declared, by the Saybrook Platform, "to be agree- 
 able to the only rule of iaith,^' viz. the scriptural rale. And in 
 the event of obtaining a charter for a College, the 39 articles, as 
 to government and doctrine, will be the standard, and not the Say- 
 brook Platform and Westminster Confession of Faith. 
 
 There are warm disputes between Calvinists and Anti-Calvin- 
 jsts, upon the doctrines taught by these 39 articles of religion ; 
 and this circumstance is high proof, we conceive, of their ac- 
 cordance with Scripture. Anti-Calvinistic Churchmen view 
 them as favouring neither Calvinism, nor Arminianism, norSocin- 
 ianism, nor any human system of divinity whatever. They are 
 given, in many instances, in the words of Scripture. They are 
 directed principally against the Church of Rome ; and without 
 a knowledge of the controversy in that Church, which termina- 
 
89 
 
 tedthe Reformation, some passages in these articles are not 
 ea^y understood. 
 
 The word Arminian is used by Yale College, as applicable to 
 the Episcopal Church, which must relate to the doctrines of 
 these 39 articles. Her testimony then, is against their Calvin- 
 ism. She uses this terra to terrify weak minds, and to keep 
 down the Episcopal Church. Calvinism or Arminianism, or 
 Socinianism, is not yet substituted for Christianity. Calvin's In- 
 stitutes are not quite equal to the Bible. 
 
 Doctor How, in his volume before spoken of, discusses this 
 subject with perspicuity and force, against their Calvinistic ten- 
 dency ; and bis arguments will perhaps be as satisfactory as Mr. 
 Dyer's opinion, contained in an extract on the last page of Ham- 
 ilton's pamphlet. And perhaps the Doctor's facts on the divine 
 right of Bishops may be as instructive as Hamilton's creed, 
 which he gives th« public in his preface, page 7. But, since 
 Calvinists claim tlie 39 articles to be in their favour, it is hoped 
 that consistency will induce them not to oppose the grant of an 
 Episcopal College, on the ground of their Anii-Calvinism. 
 
 As to the necessity, then, of valid ordination of ministers ; as 
 to strictness in the government of the Church ; as to correctness 
 in doctrine; and as to liberality in carrying principles into rigid 
 execution ; the 39 articles, and the Professors who adhere to 
 them as their system of faith and form of government, are not 
 subject to the charge of more unckaritaoteness, than are the 
 Saybrook Platform, and the adherents to that system of faith 
 and form of church government. 
 
 No objection, then, can be made to the 39 articles, in point 
 of illiberality : and now let us inquire whether any other pre- 
 . tence can be raised against the right of Churchmen to an in- 
 corporated Seminary of Learning I TOLERATION. 
 
 No. XIX. 
 
 Might of Churchmen to a College : 
 
 AND 
 
 fFhat do Episcopalians ask from the Assembly ? 
 
 1st. THEY ask for the liberty to grant testimonials of merit. 
 
 2d. They ask for the privilege of endowing a Literary Invita- 
 tion, which will support their owti faith and worship. 
 
 Should the first request be granted, the evidence of merit will 
 only be, as the respectability of the College ; and why should the 
 ability to confer such a testimonial, be always confined to one sect, 
 to the officers of Yale College .'' and Churchmen be for ever de- 
 barred from the exercise of this power .'' Is there no capacity 
 M 
 
90 
 
 in Churchmen for tnaldng proficiency in literature, or does tbeir 
 religion destroy their faculties ? Yale College takes the money of 
 Churchmen for teaching their sons; but perhaps, after they leave 
 the walls of College, their capability to judge of literary merit 
 ceases, and their progress in knowledge, bebmes retrograde, be- 
 cause they do not attend worship at the Meeting-House, instead of 
 the Church. But as a general rule, we must justify Yale Col- 
 lege in taking- the money of Churchmen, because she often^ 
 succeeds in bringing over to the Saybrook Platform creed, 
 many children of Episcopal parents, and inspiring them with, 
 hatred of Episcopacy; and of course, thicse pupils tlien becbme 
 excellfeht judges of literary merit. 
 
 Suppose that a man of equal talents and worth with the pres- 
 ident of Yale College, should give a. diploma to a certain indi- 
 vidual;, would it afford the same evidence of proficiency in sci- 
 ence, with the usual testimonial granted by the president? This* 
 iriuestion is ^Ked, to show tbe great influence which is enjoyed 
 by a college, and which is dispensed at the will of her officers, 
 and which cannot be obtained by dny other means. Should the 
 Institution be without fame, however, the degree would not be 
 desired ; and should it have less reputation than Yale College,, 
 tlie honour and the influence would' be lessened.in the same ratio. 
 No injury then can be siistained by other colleges, even should' 
 Sealjury College (Bishop Seabury's name deserving perpetuity) 
 not be respectable, or, should its officers not be eq.aal judges of 
 merit. The importance of a degree, depends on the reputa.tion 
 of the College. Yale College, then, cannot be injured, by allow- 
 ing to Churchnien the power of conferring degrees- in literature.. 
 
 Are not Churchmen, and ought they . riot to be- as much at- 
 tached to their religion, as other denominations? Have they 
 not as much solicilude for the welfare of their dhildren .'' Do 
 they not know the advantage of securing the impressions of 
 youth in favour of Aieir own faith and worship .'' Do they not 
 know the influence which histructors enjoy over the minds of 
 their pupils ? Do they not love their offspring ? 
 
 Will any man, then, stand up against them for wishing to nse 
 the same means to train up'thejr children, which are kccitrnWy,. 
 in- this country, in the hands of Presbyterians ? There is not, ia 
 this Union, sn Episcdpai College. All other dcnominatiotis have 
 Colleges. The Common Prayer is not used in any college, we 
 'b'eijeve, in America. 'The expense of a European education 
 can be borne by very few; and tke habits and moral's of youth,. 
 „are always much endangered, by reason of great distance from 
 parental goVerhraient. The pdssibility, then, of an Episcopal 
 education for their spns, is within the means of few parents; and 
 'the danger great in the event of that possibility. Is not the sit- 
 uation of Churchman peculiarly distressing in this respect ; and' 
 can any man who lias affection- for his children, and is serious in 
 his religious sentiments, raise up his hands against them, in this 
 
91 
 
 important concern ? Although they have been twice disappoint- 
 ed by the Assembly, we cannot believe a third application will 
 be unsuccessful. 
 
 Episcopalians ask also for the privilege of endotving a CoJ- 
 lege, which will support their own faith, and mode of worship. 
 
 They ask not of the State for funds* to found this coUegte.— 
 Yale College had but little for its support, in its commencement. 
 its endowment, when founded, was only forty volumes of books, 
 and they came from tie clergy. It long sitFUggled vrith difficul- 
 ties, and a full portion of these are expected to be borne by 
 ■Churchmen in rearing a respectable college. 'Let them, how- 
 ever, make the experiment. We believe that all the colleges 
 which have maintained a high reputation, began iSieir career 
 with very small means, as to money. The diligence of their 
 .professors is mose certain and constant, and the pupils better 
 taught, than where reliance upon money, for the {)rosperity of 
 ■the seminaiy, is the chief stimulant to exertion.' it is believed 
 Ahat a building may be erected, and the necessary philosophical 
 instruments rhay be procured, by indivi-dual donations. It wiB 
 attract the regard, and we hope Uie affection oi Episcopalians, 
 throughout the Union. And for this reason, we maf assert, 
 that Considerable sums of ^money will be spent in our State, by 
 students, whose parents reside in other States. Minorities, in re- 
 ligion, as well as politics, are mpre closely united, and more dis- 
 posed to assist each other, than majorities ; and by the opera- 
 tion of this principle, we may act upon the belief, that although 
 the advantages, in point of improvement in science, be riot 
 
 * Donations to JTalp CnHege by the General Assembly. Fr.oni 1701 
 
 to 1755, (5.4 yeors,) Jj6b sterling pcv annum. 1716, £"250 sterling. 1722, 
 £tl5 and £i20 sieHing. 1732, 300 acres of jand in each of the towns of 
 Canaan, -Nor/irtk,. Goshen,, Cornwall and Kent. 1740, £l>3. 1741, £42. 
 174g, £10. ni5,£5U 1749, £S6S. 1751, £500. 1754, £280. 1785, 
 £245 13s. 9d sterling. The land is not reckoned in this computation ; 
 ■apd money was perhaps three times its present worth. 
 
 About 20 years ago, Yale College had a grant from the Assembly, of 
 some old, nifliquidated claims ; fiorh which she realized a large suiii of mo- 
 ney, so large that the amount has been kept private. What other grants 
 were pnade, ii'om 1765 to 1795, by ti.e I^tgislature, or whether any, are 
 not known to us. 
 
 Large donations were made by Episcopalians ; and it is not improba- 
 ble that, without this aid, the existence of the College would have ceased. 
 Elihu Yale, Governor of the East-India.Company,.«hose name the sem- 
 inary perpetuates, was an jEpiscopalian. Ii(s donations, from 1717 to 
 1721, anfiount to £500 sterling. , 
 
 In 17po, the Rev. Dr. ©eofge .perkeley, Bfshop of Cloyne, (a Bishop, 
 Mr. Hamilton,) gave tothe Cdllege 96 apres of land in Rhode-Island, and 
 1000 volumes of booksi, including his own works, valued at £400 sterling. 
 
 Yale College, at .the time she received the balance frorn the State, of 
 its claims upon the- United States, for services rendered durinK the revo- 
 dutionary war, admitted into the Corporation six members of the Council. 
 
 This looks like Church and State ! 
 
92 
 
 cqval to those in some colleges, yet Seabury College will be pre- 
 ferred by Churchmen. Their sons, as to religion, will be better 
 educated. This policy will strengthen the Institution, where 
 clergymen can be nurtured, for the growth of their religion — 
 seminaries of learning being the most effectual agents in propa- 
 gating religion. This last truth is as well known to Churchmen, 
 as to other denominations of Christians. Look at the conduct 
 pf Presbyterians — almost all the Universities are in their hands ! 
 And how wide spread is their religion ? Have not Churchmen 
 some zeal for their principles ? And this example, set them by 
 other denominations, it is hoped they will be permitted by Pres- 
 byterians, to copy. Such zeal is according to knowledge. 
 
 But we are, we fear, writing idly. The general principles of 
 cur government, in regard to rehgion, we are apprehensive are 
 not understood. In 1764, to be sure, a law was passed by the 
 Assembly, which has been with propriety called the toleration 
 act. It places all religious denominations upon a level, or near- 
 ly so. There is no ground of complaint respecting its provis- 
 ions. But look at the law establishing the Medical Institution, 
 in 1810; look at the appropriation of ^'20,000 to that Institu- 
 tion ; look at the fate of the first application for the college, 
 terminating in an address from Yale (^ollege for the Medical 
 Institution ; look at the conduct oT the Assembly, in granting 
 that Institution, before the session closed ; look at the result of 
 the second endeavour of Churchmen to get a college ; look at 
 the conduct of Yale College, in lying back till Churchmen were 
 wearied with expostulating the A'ssembl)', and in .truth, contribu- 
 ting her aid in procuringthe votes of the legislature to be giv- 
 en against the I3ishop's Fund ; look at her conduct in applying 
 to the legislature for the whole ^'50,000 of the Phcenix Premie 
 um ; look at the conduct of the Assembly, in not rejecting, but 
 laying over this application to the next session, because they 
 had not time to get it through the forms of law ; look at these 
 facts, reader, aad can you doubt that the toleration act remains 
 a dead letter in the statute book ? Can you doubt, that the re^ 
 ligion taught in Yale College, is the established religion.'* This 
 religion receives a marked preference as to money, and as to the 
 JHcorporation of societies for- disseminating its peculiar tenetsi 
 under charitable and scriptural names. Religious societies for 
 propagating the faith of ojie sect, find no obstacles in the way 
 of getting charters to hold money. 'J'his money is said to be 
 for charitable purposes. But who are employed in missiona- 
 iing f Who receive salaries from this charitable fund ? What is 
 the amount of money now in the treasury of the missionary 
 society,'' Its amount threatens the existence of all other socie- 
 ties ; and indeed, after p. few years have passed, its probable ac- 
 cumulation will endanger the goyerijmpnt itself. 
 
 But let Churchmen applj'^ for the liberty' of endowing a Litgo 
 
9§ 
 
 fary Seminary, and a hue and cry is raised, that they want t» 
 establish Episcopacy, and to proscribe all other denominaticns. 
 
 Episcopalians, in fact, do not enjoy a real, though a legal tol- 
 eration. 
 
 Hamilton says that he does not /car an established religion. — 
 No, no, he does not fear, but he enjoys a religious establish- 
 ment. The Saybrook Platform is stilHhe reigning creed. 
 
 Yes, reader, since we still have an established reW^on, it \sidle 
 to reason with the Assembly upon the principles of toleration. 
 
 But let us turn from this view of our subject ; let us believe 
 that these facts exist only in the maginaiion of the writer ; let. 
 us believe, with Hamilton, that all Christians are " on an exact 
 equality ;" let us believe that " the cant of liberality," is true 
 and real charity ; (but,' let us not, however, believe, that liberal- 
 ity in reliffion is to be found in perfection among the Univer- 
 salists, although he thus asserts ;) let us suppose this to be our 
 case ~ — And now, let us address a few words to tiie legislature, 
 in favour of the grant to Churchmen, of bestowing diplomas of 
 merit, and of endowing, with their own money, a literary insti- 
 tution. ' / 
 
 Gentlemen, you have granted and continued these privileges 
 to Presbyterians, although thejf are, perhaps, thirty seminaries, 
 propagating their tenets. Episcopalians have not one in our 
 country. — They are willing to incur the hazard of a failure.— 
 They will endow it without calling "upon the State, although 
 large grants have been constantly made to Yale College from 
 the treasury — although individual Episcopalians have thrown in 
 their mite to aid that Institution — and althotigh Episcopalians 
 have been taxed for its support. 
 
 Is not this a reasonable request ^ Ponder it in your minds.^ — 
 " Do to others, as you would that others should do to you." 
 
 The laws of the Assembly hold you out to be the common 
 parent of all religious denominations. You will tolerate, you 
 will cherish, you will furnish means equally to enlighten, to re- 
 form, to render happy and obedient, all orders and classes of 
 citizens. This is the true, the benign, the glorious policy; the 
 voice of experience ; the dictate of wisdom ; the injunction of 
 revelation. It is duty. The Assembly will walk in this "jray ojT 
 pleasantness and peace." TOLER.ATION, 
 
 General Observations. *'»•¥. 
 
 SINCE there has been some complaint respecting the publi- 
 cation of religious subjects in a newspaper, it may be of impor- 
 tance to state, that, in a Prospectus of a religious paper, to be 
 published weekly in this city, President Dwight, the Rev. Messrs. 
 
94 
 
 Merwia and Taylor and ijeecl^ej-, haye gif en tlieir opinions in 
 its.favour. Hon. Ju^ge Reeve arid Mr. Beetcfeer say, that " the 
 newspaper is the approppate vehiple, and will becomej \ye trust, 
 •speedily, in .every State and section of our land, the common ve- 
 jbicle of religious intelligence." 
 
 The Connecticut Couraat has much matter of this description. 
 But, perhaps, the real objection is to the kind of religion intro- 
 sLuced in the paper. This objection, however, admits to be 
 praiseworthy the practice of discussing religious subjects in a 
 newspaper. Churchmen claim to be r^lig^o^s ; and shall not 
 ^pi^ regarding their welfare, and that of theijr church, never be 
 wflfefed to apjjear in tiie same coiurans with remvah of religidn., 
 and extraordinary conversions to particular tenets .'' The doc- 
 trine of conversion is held by iEpiscopali?ins ; but ihey think that 
 less ,Vioise is more .decisive of its existence. 
 
 •Churchmen hav« been silent from the date of the Toleration 
 Act, a period of 32 years. While they were under an avowedly 
 fistaMsh&d religion, viz. the Say-bfook Platform, they were com- 
 pelled not to hfip discontent. They could not support their own 
 clergy. They paid taxes to the establishment. Their religion 
 iwas ridiculed. l?ut they adhered to their faith. 
 
 There are times jivhen the truth should not be told. It niay 
 offend. It may injure its own c^e. This may now be our case. 
 -When iWpuld the time tje less ht^zardous, or more convenient to 
 Presbyterians ? Since ivw have committed, in their view, a rash 
 act, ill exposing to tlie public these facts, at tliis time, we surely 
 way be favoured with the information of a future time, when the 
 remairmg facts may be tuld with convenience to the dominant 
 sect. 
 
 And so much for our rashness in introducing facts connected 
 with religion, in a newspaper. 
 
 In the 7th page of >his preface, Hamilton has given to the 
 public his CREED ; in which, among many other tilings, he talks 
 about "profanation of the Sacraments, and usurpers of holy office." 
 This Founder of a sect endeavours to stigmatize the Episcopal 
 
 "The doctrine of the Divine right of Bishops, in the sense in 
 which some funinformed men understand it, Ae (Hamilton) disbe- 
 lieves; but as to this and some o</ier controverted doctrines, Ae 
 has the happiness to coincide in belief with some of the most 
 learned Bishops ! and Episcopal Clergy! in England ! and this 
 country ! !" ■ 
 
 How he swells,T— and swells, and swells, and bursts! 
 
 There never was any difference of belief as to " the Divine 
 right, of Bishops," among those who hold to that doctrine. If 
 he had substituted Episcopacy, he would not have committed 
 so great a blunder in his rhodomontade. 
 
 in J)is "Remarks," he says, "that Yale College never de- 
 
95 
 
 wotince(J ordination by Bishops." Readier, tfie case of Presf- 
 dent Cutler is before you, and the votes of the College, pages 
 56 and 29 — Determine for yourself. 
 
 What he (Toleration)' says about a Law School, he (Hamil- 
 ton) has no reason to hope is true. 
 
 And do you hope, Mr. Hamilton, that a Law School, with fiinds 
 from the State, will be annexed to Yale College .'' Do you Mpe^ 
 Sir, that the Saybro'ok Platform creed will be esftablished for thfe 
 profession of Law in our State ? Do you hope that all Church- 
 pien niay be excluded from practice at the bar .'' Do you hope 
 that the Litchfield Law Seminary may "experience an cmbraCfr 
 pimilar to that of the Medical Society i" Is this your hope as tO' 
 this learned profession } 
 
 You advocate the existing test- laws of Yate College and the- 
 Medical Institution ; — of course, then, you are in favour of every^ 
 office in the State being in^^ the hands of Presbytepians. But yora. 
 "are disposed, you tell us in your creed, " to put all denomina- 
 tions of Christians upon an exact eq-uality;" and that "Episcopacy 
 is not tO' be preferred to Presbyterianism."' You also say, that the 
 writer of "Toleration" is " a Gothic foe to the best interests of 
 the State ;" because we suppose he does not agree with this mild 
 cultivator of the arts of peace, .respecting the ambition of the 
 Fi'esbyterians to control the three learned professions, and to ex- 
 dude every other denora-ination in this State from practice ia 
 Physic and Law, and from- preaching in the pulpit. 
 ' This is liberality in religion ! 
 
 We will not stain otir pa*eS with quotations of his Vulgarity 
 and vain attempts at wit^* 
 
 Are Hamilton's " Remarks" a specimen of the manners of the 
 
 * VVe may, perhaps, be indulged by oilr readers,, in cmistruing, for 
 Hanniltun's bei)cfit, the Lntin words he has introduced. This translfttioii 
 'has btjen {riven on account of the s»und of the words so nearly resem- 
 \iling their sense. The story was told to the Senior Class, by the vene- 
 rable President of Yale College ; and it will apply with much propriBt^ 
 to our opponent's character and pedigree, in retaliation for his ribaldry 
 
 contained in his "Preface' and "Remarks." " Mo.iisTRDSi! hokrek- 
 
 BiJM ! iNFORMK, iNGENS !" " The gentleman's a monsteocs, horrible 
 dtformcd Indian !" 
 
 And the Medical Profesaors, with their dissecting knives, have !)ro- 
 uoiinced him to belong; to the Mohawk tribe. 
 
 Tiiuyjewn who " stands o^n«" in this controversy, and who is " enti- 
 tled to all the merit in Hamilton's pieces," should live in future ages. 
 , Let the public know, Sir, from your own mouth. — Are you not the 
 some Hamirton — Mexandtr Hamilton, who contributed to rear the" fabric 
 of our Republic, who was Secretary of the Treasury, who- wrote the 
 Federalist, and who was the great Lawyer of the age? 
 
 " I am that very man. I am a Lawyer. I am the sole A'uthor of the 
 "Preface" and " Remarks" in my Pamphlet. I am a writer of Renown ! 
 YeS, yes, I um Alexander HamiltDo. . Alexander Hamilton ! Stop ! Stop ! 
 Let me think. Let me think. Oh ! the Doctors, the Doctors, that stub- 
 horn, horrid pack ! the Doctors say, I'm of the MOHAWK tribe !" 
 
96 
 
 Bar ? They cannot be. We will not cast so foul an imputatioB 
 upon tbe profession of Law in our Stale. No other gentlemen, 
 except of his oivn tribe, ever thus degrade themselves, before a 
 tribunal of justice. 
 
 Do such "Remarks" disprove ihe facts, that a test 6f religious 
 faith is established in Yale College and the Medical Institution f 
 — that $10,000 of the Phosnix premium is ufSB the right of the 
 trustees of the Bishop's Fund ? For what good purpose, then, 
 are they introduced r Is it not from a conviction that these are 
 facts, and that the ,$10,000 really ought to be appropriated to 
 the Bishop's Fund i" Or is this course taken, to gwez. personal 
 complexion to the cotitroversy .'' 
 
 But Hamilton is loud in his complaints about our " garbled" 
 collection. We have published all the matter which was not 
 abusive. Lokman has detected Hamilton in alterations' oi his 
 piece, which happen to favour our correct Compiler's purpose. 
 - Notwithstanding all his notes, his " who says so V " that is un- 
 true," and his billingsgate in his " Preface and liemarks" — in 
 an important point o.f view, we' certainly do not object to the 
 circulation of his pamphlet. Many very well-m«aning, and wor- 
 thy, and able men, will read that compilation, (in which are con- 
 tained the pieces of his opponents,) who neVer would have seen, 
 nor perhaps heard of this pamphlet. In this particular, he has 
 promoted our views. Investigation is what we court. We wish 
 no man to be influenced in our favour, without examination. ' 
 
 The charges against the writer, of bi^gotry, fanaticism, jaco- 
 binism; hatred to Yale College, and eninity to the State ; the 
 
 impeachment of his motives ; slander, and denunciation,— 'iuust 
 pass for their value; To assert honesty of intention and convic- 
 tion of rectitude, in the commencement and progress of this 
 controversy, or to appeal to steadiness of behaviour, would be a 
 waste of words, in the view of the writer. 
 
 With cheerfulness he submits the facts to the consideration of 
 his fellow-citizens. TOLERATION. 
 
 «:$"THE litle-pa{;e of this collection was struck off before the Conclu- 
 ding Nuthber of " Toleration" and the pamphlet of Hamilton were publish- 
 ed. This must apologize for some variation in the contents of this work, 
 from thdse which the title would lead the reader to expect. 
 
 "Lokman," in answer to Hamilton's IVth Number — "Toleration," on 
 
 the Medical Institution^— Episcopacy as liberal as Presbyteriaoism 
 
 Right of Churchmen to a College— and General Observations— are ad- 
 ditional essays in this pamphlet, vfhich have never before appeared in 
 print, and which are published by TOLERATION. 
 
 EnRATCM.-.88th page, 9th line, for "punished" read furnished.