duties of a minister, to have his office conjoined with any other pursuit. And
now the time and occasion had arrived when he must boldly step forward and
speak out. In 1823, the Rev. Dr. Taylor, principal of the university of Glasgow died, and the Rev. Dr. Macfarlan, minister of Drymen, was appointed to
succeed to the office. And few were better fitted to occupy that important
charge, which he still so worthily adorns. But, hitherto, the principal of the
college had also been minister of St. Mungo's, or the High parish of Glasgow,
and it seemed a matter of course that Dr. Macfarlan should hold both livings
conjointly, to which he was appointed accordingly. It was the gentlest form
in which plurality had ever appeared in Scotland, for both charges were in
the same city, while the one, it was thought, could not infringe upon the
duties of the other. But to Dr. Macgill it appeared far otherwise. By the
statutes of the college, the principal was bound to superintend its secular affairs,
and teach theology, which was a task sufficient for any one man; and thus
the holder would be compelled either to give half-duty to both offices, or reduce
one of them to a sinecure. It was upon these arguments that Dr. Macgill
opposed the double induction. It was a stern and severe trial that thus
devolved upon one who had hitherto been such a lover of peace; and it was
harder still, that his opposition must be directed against one who was thenceforth, let the result be what it might, to become his daily colleague as well as
official superior. Many in his situation would have contented themselves
with a simple non liquet, whispered with bated breath, and thought their vote
a sufficient testimony of their principles. Superior, however, to such considerations, and anticipating the great controversy that would be at issue upon the
subject, Dr. Macgill, several months before it took place, brought the question
before the senate of the university, and finding that his learned brethren would
not coincide with him, he had entered, in the college records, his protest against
the induction. In the keen debates that afterwards followed upon the subject
in the presbytery of Glasgow, the synod of Glasgow and Ayr, and at last the
General Assembly, to which it was carried for final adjudication, Dr. Macgill
assumed the leadership; and few, even of his most intimate friends, were prepared for that masterly eloquence which he exhibited at the first step of the controversy. In taking his chief ground upon the argument of the responsibility of city ministers, and the immense amount of labour which they had
to undergo, especially in such a city as Glasgow, he invoked his brethren of
the presbytery in language that was long afterwards felt and remembered. The
question, as is well known, was lost by the evangelical party; and the union
of the offices of principal of the university of Glasgow, and minister of the
church and parish of St. Mungo was confirmed, as well as the continuance of
plurality sanctioned. But this was only a last effort. The opposition which
Dr. Macgill so boldly and bravely commenced, had aroused the popular feeling so universally upon the subject, as to command the respect of the government; and the Royal Commission, which was afterwards appointed for visiting
the universities of Scotland, confirmed the popular expression. Let us trust
that the evil thus denounced and banished, will never again find an entrance into our national church.
Besides his hostility to ecclesiastical plurality, Dr. Macgill was decidedly opposed to patronage, and earnest for its abrogation. He did not, however, go the whole length of his brethren in advocating the rights of popular suffrage. On the contrary, he was opposed to merely popular elections, and
