Charter, but by a full, irrevocable cession of powers from the whole Parliament of the United Kingdom. This is what chiefly distinguished the Canadian Constitutional Act from the charter of the older Province of Nova Scotia, and from the charters of all former Colonies. It was not a charter, but a Constitution. It was a recognition of one of the contentions that had ended in the American Revolution: that charters of self-government were vested rights of the people, not transitory creations of the Royal will. Along with the clauses establishing the Local Legislature, there was a clause declaring that there should be in Canada a Council for the affairs of Canada. It is this Council, commencing in the eighteenth century, as an engine of the Prerogative, which, by successive enactment and by steady practice, has developed into complete Constitutional Government: such as obtains to-day in all the chief Colonies of the Empire.

66

Thus the Canada Act of 1791 contained within itself the prolific germ of all that constitutional progress which has since been effected throughout the modern Colonial system. The foundation of Upper Canada was the beginning of the New Empire." 1

The secret of the New Empire is thus the autonomy of the Colonies. On this basis the author rejects the usual trilemma proposed for Canada, - Federation, Independence, or Annexation. He contends that another kind of government already has become established, local self-government, together with union in a vast Empire, of which the "Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and of the Colonies and Dependencies thereof" is the august head. This traditional title, the author contends, has already gained a new meaning with the close of prerogative government. The relation of a Canadian to the Queen is not derivative and mediate, but direct. The Queen is Queen of Canada, no less than of England. Every Canadian is ipso facto not only a subject of the Queen, but also a citizen of the "New Empire." This citizenship, however, as the author develops his scheme, becomes more and more shadowy. He criticises the Federationists for their adherence to the common conception of federal union which involves a central authority, executive, legislative, and judicial. The autonomy of the Provinces in the "New Empire," in his interpretation, is to extend, not merely to their internal administra tion, but to their foreign relations. Indeed, an "Imperial Supreme Court" seems to be the only federal sovereignty which retains its substance. Notwithstanding, therefore, the generous ardor with which the writer espouses the cause of the Empire, we think that his argument and proposals favor that of Independence. The unity he eulogizes is intrinsically moral, and in a good sense sentimental; it lacks indispensable elements of governmental unity. It is noteworthy that, from the ideal side of the Canadian problem which this book appreciates and represents, the Federation theory of the Empire is found to be defective and impracticable, as it is from the economical and practical. At this point Mr. Howland and Mr. Goldwin Smith will be found to reinforce 1 Pages 351-354.

the remarkable attack in the last " Edinburgh Review" on Imperial Federation, and to promote its contention for "Colonial Independence." The London "Spectator," while agreeing with the "Edinburgh Review" in its rejection of a federal union, contends, as does Mr. Howland, for a “community of citizenship" throughout all the countries now subject to the Queen. What this involves of obligations and rights is left wholly unexplained. It leads up, however, to a suggestion of indissoluble treaties of alliance, offensive and defensive, and of courts of arbitration, and includes in this plan the United States, as well as Great Britain and her Colonies. How it is to be decided that a casus belli has arisen is not explained. Mr. Howland advocates, with sustained and effective eloquence, the establishment of "a common tribunal" for the adjustment of disputed questions between this country and Canada. The plan deserves careful consideration. If it should be carried into effect, the consequences would be far-reaching and most salutary.

So far, the outcome of the argument favors, as the next important stage in Canadian history, practical, perhaps formal, Independence.

2

This, too, is the aspiration of those who control the politics, and have behind them the leading social and religious forces, of Old Canada. It is not, however, the sovereignty of the new Dominion for which they principally care, but the ancient leadership of the sons of France, emancipated from dependence on their mother country. In a word, the dream is of a New France, as others are seeing in a beautiful vision the new British Empire. The third book to which we would invite attention fills out the scheme of this New France to larger proportions by including the anticipated peaceful conquest of New England by the settlement in it and rapid multiplication of French Canadians. Lest we should convey a wrong impression, we would distinctly declare at this point that the main purpose of Father Hamon's book is not political, but religious. Its subject is the French Canadians in New England, and its object to aid them in preserving their faith. This, however, requires, in the author's view, that they maintain their language and their nationality. The book thus becomes incidentally, but all the more strikingly for this reason, a testimony to a purpose in a large portion of the citizens of the Dominion at variance with either of the methods of solving the problem of its political future on which we have hitherto commented. We shall probably recur at some other time to this volume on account of the valuable information it supplies respecting the French Canadian settlements in New England, and the methods and aims of the Roman Catholic Church. We notice it now simply for its outlook upon the political future. And what is noteworthy is that the writer seems to be as good as ignorant of the first member of the Canadian trilemma: "Two suppositions appear to be 1 July 25, 1891.

2 Les Canadiens-Français de la Nouvelle Angleterre. Par E. Hamon, S. J. Pp. xv, 484. Québec: N. S. Hardy, Libraire-Editeur, 9 et 10 rue Notre Dame.

1891.

possible either the Province of Quebec will have one day its autonomy, and will become an independent people; or it will annex itself to the United States."

The author leaves out of account in his reasoning many elements of the problem, not only those justly emphasized by Professor Goldwin Smith, but moral and spiritual forces as well. On this side of the line Quebec is the stumbling-stone in the path of union. But our author's forecast as to one possible result of the French-Canadian migration may in the end be justified, though in a very different way from the one which he maps out.

THE INTERNATIONAL CONGREGATIONAL COUNCIL, — WHAT IT ACCOMPLISHED; WHAT IT REPRESENTED.

Ir is doubtful if any other body of Christians could have assembled in a representative capacity, and have given so little time to ecclesiastical affairs as the Congregationalists gave at their recent Council. We will not at this point raise the question whether the absence of ecclesiasticism was or was not a mark of denominational strength. We are now simply recording a fact which is evident from the perusal of the papers and discussions which occupied the time of the delegates. No attempt was made to minimize denominational interests. There was no affectation of indiffer

ence to such matters. The historical background of Congregationalism was never lost sight of, and the practical workings of the system under the variations of differing social and political conditions were carefully presented; but evidently the interest of the Council was in matters of common religious concern. Nothing could have been broader, more catholic, more Christian, than the opening address by the President, Dr. Dale, upon the "Divine Life in Man." It was a noble and lofty utterance, worthy of being sent out as an encyclical to all the Congregational churches, and worthy of being held up as an expression of a true catholic Christianity. It struck the real note of Christian unity. We doubt if within the century so generous words have been uttered towards religious opponents as the following words recognizing the devotion to a common spiritual principle by the sacramentarian party of the Anglican Church: "It is the faith of all churches and of all theologies that can be called Christian, that the end for which the Lord Jesus Christ came into the world is the realization by man of the righteousness, the blessedness, and the glory of the life of God. Here we are at one with the great religious communities with which we and our fathers have had grave and sometimes fierce and bitter controversies, controversies on the nature and polity of the church and its place in the spiritual order; on the methods by which the divine grace effects the salvation of men; on the ideal and discipline of Christian perfection; on the authority which should determine the faith and practice of those who confess that Christ

is their Saviour and Lord. Among the men from whom we are divided by these cruel conflicts, but from whom our hearts should never be estranged, we recognize a saintliness shining with a glory that has its fountains in God; in their very contention and argument for errors which seem to us to obscure the light and impair the power of the Christian gospel we catch an accent which is the sign that they, too, are the children of the Eternal. If they maintain with passionate earnestness a doctrine of the priesthood and of the sacraments, which appears to us to be irreconcilable with the whole spirit and substance of the Christian faith, if they regard those who reject and assail this doctrine as the worst enemies of the human race, it is because for them the sacraments, when duly administered, are the appointed means by which the grace of God first originates and then sustains the divine life in man. It is this which in their judgment makes the sacramental and sacerdotal controversy so critical, so awful. In that controversy, as they suppose, the whole power and glory of the Christian redemption are at stake. They are contending for the sacredness and efficacy of the institutions by which they believe that the eternal life of God is made the actual possession of mankind."

It became evident, as soon as the theological discussions were reached, which early engaged the attention of the Council, that the theological attitude of the English Congregationalists was much freer and more fearless than that of their American brethren. Dr. Dale's magnificent affirmation of the deity of Christ in his address had been followed by the clearest and most absolute vindication of the heritage and rights of the whole human race in Christianity. When Dr. Fairbairn rose to speak, he addressed himself at once to the higher criticism, and was very pronounced in his advocacy of it. "I stand to plead for this, historical criticism has given us back the lost Scripture. Instead of saying that we had in the old doctrine a doctrine of inspiration, I am prepared to maintain that we lost it, and turned what was meant to be a great living history of redemption into a repository of evidential texts unscientifically used, and meant only for occasional service. Through the newer criticism we get at the older Scriptures, - nay, we come to see this, that the entire history that went before Christ concerned Christ; it is not a dead letter, to be read as is a will and testament: it is living history that throbs with Him, that contains Him, that blossoms into Him, and that, therefore, has Him as first, has Him as last, has Him as all in all, — the revelation, the manifestation of God in his redeeming power and saving might for men. Since, then, we have these tendencies, we have great reconstructive energies in our midst. We are nearer a systematic theology to-day than in the days of Pye Smith and Ralph Wardlaw; we are nearer a true theory of inspiration than when the Westminster Confession was formulated, or when the Congregational Union of England and Wales was founded; and we are nearer it because we

are nearer the old standpoint. If Luther came back to some of the men of to-day, he would make short work of some of their theories. I wish John Calvin would return from Geneva; he would be quite prepared to take up the cudgels on behalf of the men who are seeking to recover the Scriptures against the men who are seeking to lose them."

Dr. Bradford's strong plea for the emancipation of the American churches from doctrinal creeds as tests of membership served to bring out the comparative freedom of the English churches at this point. It has often been said that such a theological controversy as that through which we have passed would have been impossible in the English churches, not because of looser organization, but because of a different theological temper. We think that the truth of this remark must have been apparent to the American delegates at the recent Council. Indeed, had the Council been held ten years ago, it is not unlikely that it would have made the conflict impossible here. But the freedom which might have been gained by this larger and more cosmopolitan sentiment would not have been the equivalent of the freedom which has now been earned. Professor Stearns set forth in his paper very fairly, in its negative results, the effect of the theological contention in our New England churches: "During the last decade we have been discussing, as the world pretty well knows, the relation of the heathen to God's grace in Christ. The old view which prevailed during the last century, and had many advocates until quite recent times, doomed the heathen as a mass to perdition. This severe doctrine has been generally abandoned. Our discussions have not been upon this point, but upon the question as to the manner and grounds of the salvation of those heathen who are saved. The common view has been that their imperfect faith, based upon their natural knowledge of God and of such elements of truth as are contained in their corrupt religions, is reckoned to them for righteousness for the sake of Christ who gave himself a ransom for all, and that so their eternal destiny is settled on the basis of the decisions of this life. The able and devoted teachers in our beloved mother theological seminary at Andover have urged the other view, common in Germany, that an opportunity is granted the heathen in the other life, between death and the judgment, to hear the gospel, and accept or reject Christ. I do not propose to enter into the merits of our controversy. So far as it has involved unchristian bitterness, we are ashamed of it. We are hard fighters on our side of the water, and both parties have dealt heavy blows. The result of the discussion has been to emphasize the silence of the Scriptures on this subject. The majority still hold the older view, because it seems to us more in accord with the general drift of the Scripture and the principles of our New England theology. But there is increasing willingness to admit that our speculations cannot exhaust the possibilities of God's redemptive grace, and that a point of this sort can never permanently be made a test of orthodoxy."