within the "seceded" States, or within the lines of the Federal army, or to go there at all for any purpose; the conditions being that the business, in the judgment of the Government, shall be proper in itself, and warranted by the circumstances of the case and the state of the country, and that the persons concerned in it shall be loyal.

The Church looked at the simple facts, that many Southern pulpits were vacant, and that others would become so as our armies should advance; that Southern ministers had abandoned and had been driven from their positions; and that the Government would not allow any but loyal men to fill their places. Besides this, tens of thousands of freedmen, women, and children, were as "sheep without a shepherd." The Gospel, therefore, would not be preached at all to multitudes of people, white and black, many of whom were loyal, and would gladly welcome it, unless the Government should open the way. Under these circumstances, was the Church doing wrong or right in asking the sanction of the Government, obtaining a "permit," for it was no more than that, and just what is sometimes done on heathen ground,-to "go into all the South and preach the Gospel to every creature ?" Looking at the facts alone, it is clear that the Church at the North has done nothing more than her duty. Had she not done it, she would have been verily guilty before God, and the blood of multitudes of souls would have been found upon her. We do not say what might or might not have been the duty of the Church, in this case, had the application been denied. It is not necessary to raise any question of the Church's duty to preach the Gospel, even in the face of opposition from the civil power. That has nothing to do with the present issue. This, however, may be said, as a principle universally applicable,-that, if the civil power is

CHIEF GRound of COMPLAINT.

241

opposed to the Church's proper work, the Church should seek to conciliate rather than disregard such opposition. In this case, we simply look at the facts as they are. The Church could not send men South to preach without permission of the Government, or provoking its hostility. It was, then, its duty to ask permission to go within the. lines of the army, and, if granted, to accept it, provided the work itself was proper. The actual condition of the South reveals the duty, and the application vindicates the Church in seeking to discharge it in a way not to provoke collision with the Government.

CHIEF GROUND OF COMPLAINT.

But suppose the Church, looking beyond the facts, should entertain the question, whether she might not, in this course, be conniving at a great wrong done by the Government to the Southern people; how would her conduct be affected? This brings up the other side of the case. It is no doubt here that The True Presbyterian, and those who agree with it, found their great objection, denying that the Government has any right to take possession of the Southern Churches, or turn them over to loyal men from the North or elsewhere; and that the Church, in asking and accepting this from the Government, is guilty of compounding a felony with the State. Dr. Robinson speaks as follows upon this point:

When the Administration, or any of its functionaries, obtrudo themselves into the affairs of religion, and undertake to direct the affairs of Christ's kingdom, from which they are restrained both by the law of Christ and the Constitution of the country, we are obliged to treat them as any other false teachers and usurpers in the Christian commonwealth. *** It comes to settling the powers of civil and military government over religion. *** The people of the country will surely be slow to recognize such powers over religion in this Government; for who knows how soon the order may be extended to

embrace Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania, as well as Missouri, Tennessee, etc.?

When the cases become similar in Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania, and through treason and rebellion the ministry and people of the Churches in those States turn traitors, and their pulpits become vacant, as is now the case all through the South within the lines of the Federal armies, then "the order may be extended to embrace" them also, on the ground of the most unquestionable principles of public law, as recognized among all nations. It is on this ground that the course of the Government toward disloyal ministers and people at the South is justified.

GOVERNMENT AND CHURCH VINDICATED BY THE LAW.

The laws of war regard all citizens of a hostile nation as public enemies, whether actually engaged in war or not.* When a nation is engaged in civil war, and, as in the present case, is attempting to put down a rebellion undertaken by organized States, all persons within the territory in rebellion are in like manner deemed enemies of the Government. This is settled public law among all nations; and it has been so held in regard to the present rebellion, by the Supreme Court of the United States.

But the case immediately in hand goes far beyond this. It concerns ministers and churches that are notoriously in

"It is understood that the whole nation declares war against another nation; for the sovereign represents the nation, and acts in the name of the whole society; and it is only in a body, and in her national character, that one nation has to do with another. Hence, these two nations are enemies, and all the subjects of the one are enemies to all the subjects of the other. In this particular, custom and principles are in accord. * * * Since women and children are subjects of the State, and members of the nation, they are to be ranked in the class of enemies. But it does not thence follow that we are justifiable in treating them like men who bear arms, or are capable of bearing them. It will appear in the sequel, that we bave not the same rights against all classes of enemies."— Vattel, b. 3, ch. 5.

It is very evident that the common laws of war ought to be observed by both parties in every civil war."-Vattel, b. 3, ch. 18.

GOVERNMENT AND CHURCH VINDICATED.

243

open rebellion, and are among the leaders in the revolt. What the Government has done is to recognize these facts, and to assume control of the property which these fugitive rebels left behind them, and which had been used against the Government. So far as this church property is concerned, the Government might have confiscated every dollar of it to its own use by the regular operation of military law; for, notoriously, these abandoned pulpits were the places which bred and fostered treason, and without which the rebellion would never have had more than an abortive birth; and they were the most powerful instigators of the war against the Government, up to the very moment its armies reclaimed the ground on which they were built.*

When Admiral Farragut captured New Orleans, he or General Butler might have taken Dr. Palmer's Church for a hospital, or for any other military purpose, and the Government might retain it forever as such, a standing monument to the infamy of his treason; for the trustees, elders, pew-holders, and all claiming an interest in the property, had permitted him from that pulpit to assail the Government with his unwonted eloquence, and to urge the people to open rebellion against its authority. All property, public or private, used in open aid of war, is liable to

*"When once we have precisely determined who our enemies are, it is easy to know what are the things belonging to the enemy (res hostiles). We have shown that not only the sovereign with whom we are at war is an enemy, but also his whole nation, even the very women and children. Every thing, therefore, which belongs to that nation,-to the state, to the sovereign, to the subjects of whatever age or sex,-every thing of that kind, I say, falls under the description of things belonging to the enemy."- Vuttel, b. 3, ch. 5. "We have a right to deprive our enemy of his possessions, of every thing which may augment his strength and enable him to make war. This every one endeavors to accomplish in the manner most suitable to hiin. Whenever we have an opportunity, we seize on the enemy's property, and convert it to our own use; and thus, besides diminishing the enemy's power, we augment our own, and obtain, at least, a partial indemnification or equivalent, either for what constitutes the subject of the war, or for the expenses and losses incurred in its prosecution,—in a word, we do ourselves justice.”—Ibidem, b. 3, ch. 9.

condemnation on its capture. No principle of public law is more fully laid down by all writers on the Laws of Nations and the Laws of War than this; and it applies to the vast majority of Church edifices throughout the South. By their being used as among the most powerful means for sustaining and prosecuting the war, the Government has an indefeasible title to use them if it can capture them; to eject disloyal ministers and people from them, and to appropriate them to any proper purpose in maintenance of its just authority.

But what has the Government actually done? It has preserved these Churches for religious worship, and has simply taken a course which would secure loyal men to occupy their pulpits. This is the whole case, and the Government stands justified, while in fact it might have appropriated them to other uses.

And what has the Church done? Its course is fully vindicated both by the facts and the law.

And yet a howl of indignation has come over from the city of Toronto, week after week, and has taken form in traitorous paragraphs in the city of Louisville, and its senseless bellowings are echoed through the land to frighten pious and timid women.

VINDICATED BY REBEL AUTHORITY.

If Dr. Robinson is willing to receive instruction touching the relations of Church and State, bearing directly upon the point in hand, we refer him to a teacher whom at least he ought to respect. It comes from the pen of Dr. Thornwell. It is found in the "Address of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America," which was republished in Louisville with commendation, and with which Dr. Robinson probably had something to do. The following