the way of the Lord's work among the nations; though, blessed be his name, that work shall prosper, whether impeded by angry foes or erring friends. We do not concede to Mr. Thelwall's society the name of "Trinitarian," any more than to Papists the title of "Catholics," or to Socinians that of "Unitarians ;" because the assumption is a slur upon other Bible societies, all of which are as really Trinitarian, as the "No. 11 Exeter Hall" institution. The Naval and Military Bible Society is actually constructed upon their own model; the Christian Knowledge Society, which is a Bible Society upon a scale of magnitude to which it would be romantic to suppose the Exeter Hall institution will ever attain, is guaranteed by the Trinitarianism of the Anglican church; and the British and Foreign Bible Society, (though it has not, like the No. 11 Exeter Hall vacillating Society, adopted first one test and then another, but stopped short in its career as soon as a test was proposed to expel the Irving heresies which so deeply infected it; thus virtually guaranteeing as scriptural and orthodox all that it does not specifically exclude) is in reality, though without the idle parade of an uninforced and utterly useless test, as really Trinitarian as the No. 11 Exeter Hall Society. Its sole object is to circulate a book, Trinitarian in itself, and in every version which the Society has made or uses; the copies in the English being exclusively those of the authorised version, which is Trinitarian in its headings and summaries as well as in the text, so that no Socinian can honestly aid in its circulation; and it is as Trinitarian in its management as in its object, for no Socinian or Arian has ever been on its committee; and the Society would repel with horror the idea of circulating an anti-Trinitarian version—or rather perversion-of the sacred oracles. The No. 11 Exeter Hall Society is not better fortified than the Bible Society; for though it calls itself "Trinitarian," it makes no objection to receiving Socinian guineas; and if a Socinian chose to be a member, there is nothing to prevent his becoming so; as the Society does not, like the Christian Knowledge Society, and every other Society which honestly enforces a test, require a testimonial, or a pledge, or a ballot; it prudently asks no questions, but pockets its guineas (when it can get any), and allows any person who chooses, to join it and be a member, upon his personal unchallenged honour that he is what he ought to be. It were absurd to call a Society thus conducted, orthodox, even if there were no other form of heterodoxy but Arianism or Socinianism; but many of the sects one reads of— whether those in the ancient church; or the obsolete Dunkers, Muggletonians, and so forth; or Shakers, Southcottians, Swedenborgians, and Irvingites-are heterodox also: yet these the Society does not pretend to exclude; it freely and cheerfully admits them to membership: Irvingites in particular are its cherished friends; for when it was proposed to make a regulation which would have excluded those who malign our Divine Redeemer's spotless nature, the majority of the members refused to do so; whereupon the anti-Irvingite portion of its founders quitted it; and strongly as the Christian Observer spoke of the exceptionable proceedings of the Institution, our statements fell far short of those of its seceding friends in the Record newspaper and elsewhere; and for this good reason, that they better knew than we did, the secrets of its proceedings.*

* As Mr. Thelwall and his friends have chosen to provoke a new controversy on behalf of their Society, it may be well to exhibit the character of the Society as described by the conductors of the "Record" newspaper, who had been its zealous panegyrists till it chose to CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 20.

identify itself in "scriptural and brotherly union" with Irvingism. Thus wrote the Record:

"It cannot be concealed, and surely we have no wish to conceal, that the first attempt which has been made, by using separation as an instrument, to induce 3 Q

We are not then inclined to look for any marked exhibition of wisdom or charity in this Institution; nevertheless, if it pursued its plans peaceably, without catering for support by disparaging its neighbours, we could be well content to continue to leave it unreproved; as we have done for several years, notwithstanding almost all its proceedings, and the speeches of its members, have been provocative of just rebuke. We find no fault with Mr. Thelwall for pointing out any faults in versions of the Scripture issued by the Bible Society, or other Societies; this, if done with a view to their correction, would be a brotherly, as well as useful, act; but the whole tenour of his remarks, as well as the Report of his Society, and the speeches of his colleagues, are shaped with a view to disparage his Christian brethren, and to urge all godly persons to come over to his own Society, which professes to be "conducted upon scriptural principles," "setting forth the true, the scriptural, grounds of real Christian union," (vide Mr. Thelwall's speech), " asking for no broader union than the church of Christ" (Mr. Galton's speech); so that the Society includes in this sacred scriptural union of Christ's church, Swedenborgians, Southcottians, and all other so-called Protestants who do not profess to be anti-Trinitarians,— a wondrously scriptural and godly amalgamation! Mr. Thelwall has let out the fact, that his committee expressly inserted the name of the British and Foreign Bible Society in connexion with his animadversions, because otherwise his critical paper "would not be understood to be a matter of any interest or concern to British Christians." They have acted with equal prudence in declining to mention the name of the Christian Knowledge Society in connexion

the British and Foreign Bible Society to yield the points at present in dispute, has signally failed.

By an advertisement in another column, our readers will perceive what passed at the special meeting of the Trinitarian Bible Society, which was convened for Thursday last. Those proceedings have, in our judgment sealed the doom of that institution.

"How completely public confidence was shaken in the Society, by the wellgrounded reports that the Committee had not had the wisdom, judgment, or ability to keep themselves free from the pestilent heresy of Mr. Irving, was clearly manifested by the insignificant number which appeared to take part in the business of the day. It appears, from the advertisement in another column, that the greatest number present at any part of the day, gentlemen and ladies together, was 105 of these, fifteen were supposed to have retired without voting, three declined to vote, the minority consisted of thirty-nine, and the majority, a very large proportion of which may be presumed to have been Irvingites, was fortyeight!

"So that, even as it regards numbers, to what has the magnificent meeting dwindled which assembled for the formation of this Society! It is not the paucity of its numbers, however, of which we complain. We grieve that it has

now identified itself with fundamental error, so that it is impossible for any sound-hearted Christian to have further connection with an institution which has unhappily placed itself in an incomparably worse situation than that of the body from which, on account of its alleged impurity, it separated.

"Should the friends of the British and Foreign Bible Society think it worth while to waste a single word further on the subject, (which we hardly think it is, so complete is the overthrow) they may say 'We told you this from the first-that, according to the principle upon which you sought to build, no edifice could be erected, or if erected hold together.' We have however already shewn the inaccuracy of this view of the subject. All that was wanting was a small measure of that common sense in the committee of the new society, which is to be found in that of the old. Is there any Irvingite has there been any Socinian-on the Committee in Earlstreet? No. Are they excluded by law? No; simply by common sense and common wisdom. Is there any openly immoral person in either committee? No. How is he excluded? Simply by a common feeling of propriety. And had there been upon the minds of the committee of the Trinitarian Bible Society any thing approaching to a just sense of the infinite evil bound up in this new heresy

with the Apocrypha; because they are trying to recommend themselves, and to disparage the Bible Society, by the unfair assumption of the title "Trinitarian ;" whereas they know that a really Trinitarian Society-a Society which includes all the prelates, and a large portion of the clergy of England-circulates (conscientiously, but in our view not rightly,) the Apocrypha; whereas a Society without any test has rejected it. If Mr. Thelwall could have discovered a copy of the Apocrypha in Earl-street, how would he and his associates have made the direful fact re-echo throughout the land, as an argument for breaking up the Bible Society, and uniting with the No. 11 Exeter Hall "Scriptural Union" Society. But they have discreetly refrained from storming No. 67 Lincoln'sInn-Fields; and should they now do so, by our having thus challenged them in common honesty to speak out, they will have to confess that even a much stricter test than their own-which is indeed no test at all-will not of necessity prevent the printing of apocryphal books, or secure an immaculate text.

One of the "Trinitarian" Society's laws-a law still unrepealed and unrepealable, unless by newly constituting the Society-justly caused much displeasure and suspicion at the very outset, we mean that which excludes clerical members from voting at, or even being present at, the proceedings of the committee. The Society has always shrouded its proceedings in secresy. It had indeed what was called a public meeting at its formation; but the rules-and among them that which excludes clergymen, as such, from attending the committee-were pre-arranged in secrecy by a self-elected provisional committee; and Mr. Perceval, when he read them from the chair at the meeting, twice read

which has appeared in the church, any individual even supposed to be infected with it, would have been excluded without an approach to a difference of opinion, with exactly the same readiness, and exactly by the same power, as an openly immoral person would have been excluded had such a one been proposed. That the reverse of all this has been the case, coupled with the Resolution which we have just quoted, proves incontestibly that in the minds of that Committee there exists a leaning to, or tolerance of, the evil in question, which is in no small degree dangerous to themselves individually, and which must of necessity deprive them of the confidence and support of the sound part of the church of Christ, which otherwise might be disposed to give them its support.

"We accordingly humbly but earnestly exhort all Auxiliary Societies and Associations of the Trinitarian Bible Society, to dissolve their connection with it at once. This Society separated from the British and Foreign Bible Society, because of its admitting Socinians as members, though not one of that body had ere been admitted on the Committee, or assumed any prominence in the proceedings of the parent Society. But here is the Trinitarian Society deliberately approving of those who hold doctrine worse than those of Socinians, becoming not members only, but managers of the So

ciety. They are in truth preparing a cradle for this most malignant heresy, in which it may be rocked and cherished into size and strength-into vigour and maturity. They are fitting up a marketplace in which it may meet with many unsuspecting souls, whom it would not otherwise reach, and inoculate them with the deadly virus.

"At the formation of the British and. Foreign Bible Society, though one and another were only gradually admitted into the councils of the originators of the Society, being carefully selected on account of their Christian character, and superior wisdom and sagacity, considerable risk of discomfiture was experienced in the arrangement of the Committee. This danger, however, was happily overcome. The Provisional Committee from which the Trinitarian Society derived its existence, was a body of men held together by no other tie than their disapprobation of certain practices current in the British and Foreign Bible Society. They were not a body formed of materials, chosen as peculiarly suitable to work harmoniously together, - not of men who were selected for their established Christian character, and sound spiritual judgment, as fitted to command the confidence of the Christian community, but they were rather brought together by a mere fortuity."

the committee's resolution, that no person should be permitted "to speak or vote against them;" so that, very properly, he did not act the farce of pretending to "put them " for the approbation of the meeting; and when some person arose to make some remark, or propose some modification, he was silenced by the authority of the chairman, under the vigilant eye of the police; so that the meeting was made responsible for the secreta monita of the provisional conclave, without the possibility of discussing or opposing them. We have never known such a step taken upon any other occasion, except where party-spirit prevailed over honesty. It is true that at many meetings for forming societies—such, for instance, as the recent Church Education Societies-the originators of the measure have very properly pre-arranged the business; but the proposed rules are in such cases open to remark or amendment; and are almost always modified or improved at the general meeting; whereas Mr. Thelwall's colleagues, at their private provisional meeting, secretly resolved upon a regulation which should exclude the clergy from the liberty of attending the deliberations of the committee; and also passed another resolution, that no person at the public meeting should speak or vote against it. Vote they could not, for Mr. Perceval did not put the resolutions; speak they durst not, for fear of the chairman and the police; but disapprove they did, and do still; and all Mr. Thelwall's apologies, whatever they may be, for this and other of the Society's arbitrary un-English style of proceeding, will not reconcile them to it.

This ejection of the clergy was very ominous, and shewed the "Naval and Military" views of the Society. Why should not all clergymen who are members of the Society, (or bishops, if there should ever be one on the catalogue,) be allowed to be present, as they are, or may be, in the Christian Knowledge Society and the Bible Society? Even if they were not allowed to vote or speak, they might at least be permitted to hear; but this would not answer the purposes of secrecy; nay, some clergyman might understand so little of the spirit of the institution, as to ask whether all that the committee say and act is right; or might recommend that they should "do their own business," instead of spending time, and money, and agency, in picking holes in other Societies; or might reprobate the juggle by which, to affect consistency, the leaders of the institution maintained that Romanists, though they adhere to the three creeds,—the Athanasian as much as the others,-are not Trinitarians; or might doubt whether Captain Vernon Harcourt, who presided at the late meeting, did not stretch a point, when he spoke of "the Socinian learning of these versions,”namely, as he explained it, "the versions which the Society has adopted to circulate in Roman Catholic countries," and which "the Roman Catholics find it their interest to circulate." Captain Vernon Harcourt and his friends may well not wish clergymen to be present at the free conversation meetings of his committee, when even in set speeches at the annual meeting such unfounded statements are put forth. One of the strongest accusations of the church of Rome against Protestantism is, that it has been the abetter of Socinianism and other anti-Trinitarian heresies; and though the charge is groundless, yet the Oxford Tracts re-echo it; but with all our abhorrence of the church of Rome, we never have surmised that she has found it her interest to circulate Socinian Bibles-and moreover in Roman Catholic countries- and aided the Bible Society in doing so.

In proof that the objections to the "Trinitarian" Society's plan and constitution, and especially in the regulation above referred to, are not newly-invented, we will quote a portion of what we said on this head in our volume for 1832, p. 123.

"The Churchman has no guarantee (for all checks are systematically removed)

that the machine may not fall into the hands of Dissenters; and its versions, if ever it should attempt any, be made to speak any particular set of tenets which the conductors for the time being choose. Can any conscientious clergyman join such a society? a society in which, next year, there may not be a single clergyman, or even a single churchman, on the committee? Our readers may be assured that we are not exaggerating in this or any other of our remarks; for the Society's own code of rules is before them, stitched up with our last Number. There is not, we repeat, the slightest security for the Church of England; the word ⚫ Clergyman' or member of the Church of England is never once mentioned in the rules; and a clergyman has no right, as we have seen, to attend the committee from his office in virtue of his being a member. He is to pay his guinea, and the secret committee are to do what they like with it; and if his flock ask him what pledge he can give them that their money will be properly bestowed, and that abuses will not find their way into the Society far greater than those alleged against the old institution, he can only answer that he takes for granted all will be right. He has no confidence in the great body of religious persons of all persuasions watching over each other's movements in an open committee that keeps no secrets; but he has perfect confidence in the little secret knot of untried gentlemen debating in a close chamber, and with inaccessible books, who, for any thing he can know to the contrary, may have other objects in view than the mere circulation of the Scriptures."

We see no reason to alter our opinion; on the contrary, the experience of seven years has confirmed it. The Rev. H. Melvill—who took a zealous, and we are sure conscientious, share in the formation of the institution, but was soon obliged to quit it-remarked in parting, that "the committee, instead of minding their business, and distributing the word of God, had been employed from their formation to that hour in quarrelling, and picking holes in private character.” This might be well expected of a body of men, of whom their own early friend the Record, as we have seen, was obliged to pronounce that they "were brought together by a mere fortuity; that (instead of the pure spiritual union which they so loudly profess) "they were held together by no other tie than their disapprobation of certain practices current in the British and Foreign Bible Society," (a most hallowed Scriptural bond truly !); that "they were not men selected for their established Christian character and sound spiritual judgment," or "fitted to command the confidence of the Christian community." Under these unhappy circumstances, we must assure Mr. Thelwall that even if he could convince us (which we do not expect) that the Earl Street Bible Society is as nefarious as the advocates for the "Trinitarian" Society have declared it to be, we still should not send our guinea to No. 11 Exeter Hall; but must double our subscription to the Christian Knowledge Society, which distributes orthodox Bibles, and does not waste its funds or its breath in vilifying other institutions. We now give such portion of our correspondent's letter as our present Number allows.]

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

SINCE I forwarded to you a paper on the origin and early records of language, which you have obligingly printed in your Number for June, the yearly meetings of our religious societies have taken place; which, though of course attended with their share of human evil, are requisite to form in many minds, and to keep alive, that hallowed flame of pious zeal in the cause of Bibles and Missions, and of other objects, which has been kindled in our highly favoured and wealthy country, and which is the pre-eminent honour of the present century. From reading the speeches at the meeting of the British and Foreign Bible Society, as well as of that ill-fated Institute calling itself Trinitarian, together with extracts from their reports, I learn that the carbona