A meeting of the Free Church congregation having been convened on Tuesday evening, for the two-fold purpose of congratulating the Rev. Alexander Salmon and Mr. Arthur M. Sheriff on their safe and very opportune arrival from home, in Australia, and hearing an address from Mr. Salmon on the principles and present position of the Free Church, both at home and in the colonies, which it was understood would be delivered. A considerable number of persons, including other Presbyterians and members of other denominations, notwithstanding the inclemency of the weather, attended at the appointed hour.

Dr. James Drummond was called to the chair, in the absence of the Mayor, who intimated through Mr. Forbes his inability to be present, in consequence of his own indisposition and the protracted and dangerous illness of his brother - but he assured the meeting that his heart was sincerely attached to the cause, and that he viewed the contemplated proceedings with deep interest. A psalm having been sung and a prayer offered up by the Rev. James Forbes.

Mr. Salmon rose and spoke to the following effect - no attempt being made to give a verbatim report of his very eloquent address. He was truly gratified to observe that he had arrived in a far distant land where so many persons professed their sincere adherence to the Free Church, and he felt great pleasure in assuring those present that the Free Church at home felt a lively interest in the spiritual welfare of Australia. He could safely say that a special interest had lately been awakened in Scotland as to the spiritual concerns of the whole vast continent of Australia, which had begotten a disposition in many of his brethren to proceed there provided the necessary arrangements could be made by the church at home, and the people of the colony unitedly.

The missionary cause was one in which the church had ever felt a keen interest as evidenced by her liberal support of missionaries in many parts of the world at this time when her troubles were great, and her difficulties seemed almost overwhelming.

The principles of the Free Church were precisely the same with those the church had asserted, and so nobly maintained two hundred years ago, when her members and ministers were "persecuted like partridges on the mountains" - when they had to unite together in the praise and worship of God, and in the dispensation of Gospel ordinances in the recesses of dens and caverns, and "amid the din of the rushing torrent;" the people of Scotland then maintained in the midst of blood and death that Jesus Christ was the only spiritual head of the church. They opposed successfully the principle asserted by the Stewarts that the king was the only supreme head and judge in matters spiritual as well as temporal. They were willing to allow the King's supremacy in all civil causes, and in every other affair that did not relate to the spiritual interests of the church to as great an extent as could justly be expected from eminently loyal subjects.

The principles of the Free Church being then strictly identical with those maintained two hundred years ago, and subsequently admitted and established, it was a gross calumny to stigmatize the adherants of the Free Church of the present day "as rebels to the law." They would be famed among the foremost ranks in defending the law, and maintaining the authority of the British Constitution in all its supremacy and integrity. The only ground upon which such an unjust accusation rested, was that their forefathers had proved traitorous to the cause of Charles the I and II: but this was equally unjust and erroneous with the inference drawn from it. The Presbyterians of that day, whose principles are those maintained by the Free Church of the present day, stood by King Charles the I to the very last, till the period arrived when all further opposition would have been pronounced madness; whilst the Episcopalians, notwithstanding that the watch-word of "No King, no Bishop" had been loudly sounded in their ears, deserted him, and tamely surrendered their Sovereign to the certain consequences of an ignominious death. The Presbyterians remonstrated against his death, and when they could not prevent that deplorable act they adopted without hesitation the necessary means for avenging it; and their devotion to the law, evinced by their chivalrous support of Charles the II, was no less distinguished though requited so unworthily.

But he would refrain from entering further upon occurrences which were admitted to form part of the historical facts of the country, and would refer to the controversy that had been pending between the church and the law courts. The distinctive principle involved in that controversy was, that the people had a real and essential part in the inducting of any minister to a spiritual charge; this principle had been insisted on since the reformation, and frequently recognized by the Government until 1711, when the iniquitous law of patronage was passed quite contrary to the rights of the church, as solemnly set forth in the first and second books of discipline. But even after this period, it was clear that the law still considered the people as having something to do and say in the matter; for before a patron could exercise his functions under the new law, it was necessary that the call should be signed by the people, that custom was still recognised as forming part of the legitimate business of the courts of the churches; but even this right became neglected or as little esteemed as so much waste paper under the reign of moderatism. Patrons could just do as they pleased in exercising their privileges - could bestow a church upon a man though unacceptable to the people without any opposition from the church courts, the moderates in the church having joined the patrons in trampling upon the rights of the people, and contenting themselves with working out the law to the letter and neglecting its spirit, or regardless whether the spiritual instruction of the people was duly provided for. There had always been an honored minority in the church who witnessed with pain and sorrow the degeneracy of their beloved church, and the awful state of irregularity and insensibility of the fair claims of the people which she in her conduct displayed; but their numbers constituting a weak minority, what could their efforts avail against the combined strength of a large majority? However, about thirty years ago it pleased God to infuse a spirit of reform into the church, by raising up a number of men, no less distinguished for their learning and talents, than for their piety, who had the welfare of the church, no less that that of the people, sincerely at heart, and by the unceasing perseverance and unwearied application of these few devoted men, the popular or Evangelical party of the church, became the majority in 1813. When they thus became the majority, was it to be supposed they would neglect acting upon their sincere conviction for the spiritual benefit of the people, which had been the aim and end of their previous perils and struggles? They, accordingly, adopted the necessary measures for rendering the 'call' of the people a most effective instrument. But they were met in every stage of their reformatory course, by opposition from the civil courts - the spiritual functions of the church were ruthlessly trampled under foot. Every act was traversed whereever it related to the induction of a minister, or the dispensation of gospel ordinances. Every particle of spiritual supremacy was met with an interdict from the Court of Sessions, and a threat of punishment. Ministers, after having been solemnly deposed upon the authority of the Courts of the Church, were subsequently reinstated in all their functions. When such things have been done, and acquiesed in, can the Church of Scotland be now called a church? At all events, can it be called a Church of Christ? The Civil Courts had not the power to inflict all their injuries before the new interpretations of the law were made. At most all they could do was to hand over the stipend, glebe, and other temporalities to the minister, presented by the patron, but he only who had been chosen by the people and inducted by the presbytery could be considered as the minister of the parish.

An awful abuse of the law on this subject had been made by Lord Brougham, which with his great talents and influence mainly contributed to the decision of the House of Lords against the churches of Scotland, for he still considered the Free Church to be the church of Scotland. His Lordship after having perverted and distorted the law upon the matter to suit his own peculiar views referred to a case that had occurred in Zetland about eighty years ago. The presentation to a vacant parish had not been made by the patron the Earl of Zetland within the statutary period, consequently the presbytery proceeded to induct a minister chosen by the people. The case was brought before the court of session and the Earl having proved that the presentation did not reach that remte place in consequence of the tempestuous weather generally prevailing in that region, the induction of the minister was declared to be null and void; but in a subsequent application to the court of sessions for the purpose of dispossessing the incumbent of his living, the court solemnly decided that they had no power to interfere further in the matter. Yet Lord Bougham had seized upon this isolated case and argued therefrom (and he regretted to say successfully) that precedents existed of the civil courts having controlled by their decisions the proceedings of the spiritual courts. But the residuary churches had voluntarily submitted to the woeful degradation of permitting the civil courts to place their hands upon the head of a man and iniquitously induct him into a spiritual charge. The residuary church was now in this precise position. She was in the painful predicament of receiving nay man appointed by the civil courts or abandoning her temporalities, a sacrifice which few of them was prepared to make. In the celebrated Auchterarder case, the call was signed by only two persons, and the proposed incumbent was objected to by four thousand of the parishoners, yet his ministrations had been forced upon the people. Lord Aberdeen's act would afford them no substantial relief, being, as a celebrated character had said, only calculated to benefit "blockheads or blackguards." By this act the presbytery are authorised and required to go to a particular church at a given day and hour, and laying their hands upon the head of a particular minister indicated by the civil courts, say, "we by the command of God and church, give you the spiritual charge of this people," while the command for doing so has really proceeded from the court of session, at the request of Lord Kinnoul or some other inveterate stickler for the privileges of patronage. After many years of successful resistance, in which all the energies of a free country were keenly devoted in asserting the purity of their religion and the headship over their church, it was reserved to the nineteenth century to witness the degradation of that church, and the rights of the people ruthlessly trampled on the ground. A deep and heinous sin had been wantonly perpetrated and culpably acquiesced in. The Church of Scotland was no longer the pride and glory of that country; but, by the shameful and iniquitous compliance of its members, justly became the scorn and reproach of man, being no longer a witnessing church for Christ; she had suffered herself, without a struggle, to be reduced to a most humiliating position, notwithstanding her former noble contendings, when Knox, Melville, and other venerated worthies guided the helm of her affairs, and in doing so had deliberately committed a great sin, and cast a stain upon the land. An opinion was prevalent here, as well as in other British Colonies, that Presbyterians had no right to concern themselves with the conduct of the Church at home, so long as no domination was attempted over their own consciences, and they were in the enjoyment of equal religious rights with others; and they admit that if they had been at home, they would have attached themselves to the Free Church; but his opinion was, that if the rights of Christ over His Church, even at the distance of the North Pole, had been infringed and subverted, it was the incumbent duty of all Christians professing that form of faith, wherever residing, to raise up their voices in bold remonstrance against the sacrilegous act. What! was it a light matter, and one in which they had no concern that the crown rights of Christ should be torn from his head and trampled in the dust? and if this circumstance were undeniable, how could men continue in communion, and fraternise with, the present Church of Scotland, as established by law without participating of her guilt, and abetting her iniquitous acts? If, upon due reflection, they really arrived at the conclusion that she had acted sinfully, their conduct clearly was to have protested against her proceedings, and their not having not done so much as this, shewed they were indifferent as to how far their own conduct could be compromised, by tacitly approving that of others. But in no respect had the reckless disregard of every principle of right been more conspicuously displayed than in the dealings of the residuary church in the matter of the quoad sacra churches which had been called into evidence, principally by the exertions of that great and good man, Dr. Chalmers, and upon the express pledge that they should for ever be considered as parish churches. Two hundred of these churches were planted in Scotland at the time of the disruption, and were every one of them in active operation, and doing an incalculable amount of good.

But what had been the conduct of the residuary church towards all these churches? This could best be shewn by referring to the fate of his own church of Barrhead. It contained sittings for 1,100 persons, and the cost of erection amounted to between three and four thousand pounds, the whole of which, less the sum of £150 was contributed by his own hearers. When the disruption took place, the church was claimed by those who adhered to the establishment, and for three months afterwards the congregation worshipped in the church in momentary expectation of an interdict being issued from the court of session - at length the dreaded interdict arrived on a Tuesday, and he formed one of a deputation, sent by the Free Church to England, to acquaint their neighbours there to their position, having in the interim been compelled to leave his parish, the hour of nine o'clock on Saturday night was considered the most becoming time to execute the interdict. His hearers, however, were not taken at a disadvantage, for one of them being an extensive bleacher of cloth, the building used for this purpose was speedily emptied of its contents, and the whole congregation met there next day, esteeming the inconvenience they had sustained, but a light matter in comparison with the disadvantages of being deprived of hearing the gospel. For fourteen Sabbaths divine service was conducted in the open air within a hundred yards of their own churches, the door of which was fast locked, and severe would have been the punishment inflicted on the man who would dare to open it. The possession of the church was formally demanded, and they knowing how the law would operate against them, at once offered to resign it upon condition that a debt upon it of £1,600, for the payment of which they were alone liable, should be paid, or that they should be released from such an obligation. This offer, and every other means of a fair and liberal accommodation having been rejected, the assistance of the law was called into requisition, and the law proceedings extending over a period of two and a half years, the result was, that the residuary part got their church, which had been offered to them at first, and had to pay £300 of law expenses, while those, who chiefly built it, had to pay £200. Surely, Presbyterians in the colonies could not look upon such dishonest proceedings with apathy and indifference; they were bound to remonstate against them, and if they identified themselves with a church that could be guilty of such iniquitous acts, their conduct, in his opinion, would be rendered unjustifiable. He rejoiced that so many, in this district, had viewed the conduct of the Residuary Church in its true kight, and had wholly separated from her. He would not say that God was confined in the inscrutable operations of his free grace to any particular church, but this he would say, with boldness, and without fear of contradiction, that it was the duty of every Christian to satisfy himself thoroughly that the church to which he adhered was, both in doctrine and discipline, founded on the Word of God. He would recommend to all the necessity of person piety and vital godliness. If these were wanting in any man, it mattered little to which church he belonged. Men, who looked upon salvation itself with a cold eye and insensible heart, could not be supposed to be much interested about the honor of Christ.

The Rev. Messrs. Thomas Hastie, James Forbes, and John Zieglar Huie, and Mr. Everist (Elder) severally addressed the meeting, and two resolutions pertinent to the business before the meeting were passed; but fearing your limits will not admit of a more lengthened communication upon this subject, I must rest contented with only adding that the meeting separated highly gratified with the whole proceedings of the evening, and the attachment of most of those composing it to the principles of the Free Church confirmed and considerably deepened.

I may add further, that the laudable view of lightening the duties of the Rev. Mr. Forbes, whose health, to the regret of his congregation, still continues in a very precarious state, the necessary steps have been taken to make a call to the Rev. Mr. Salmon to act as his colleague; but it is very doubtful whether Mr. Salmon be in a position to accept of it, as he has been specially destined by the church committee for the Free Church in Sydney. However, it is understood the matter will be regularly brought before the Synod at an early period. Mr. Salmon proceeds in a day or two on a short visit to Van Diemen's Land.