characters, render it probable that fanaticism will increase rather than diminish!"

does not know. progress" of their

What is to be done with these fanatics? Truly, the Reviewer 'He cannot see what is likely to impede the opinions. He is not wanting in good will: but what can he do? He "believes them to be very good subjects; and has no doubt but that any farther attempt upon their religious liberties, without reconciling them to the Church, would have a direct tendency to render them disaffected to the state." He thinks "something may perhaps be done in the way of ridicule;" but ridicule in some men's hands becomes itself ridiculous.

Ah, well may these Reviewers talk of their “feeble endeavours in assisting the public judgment!" They have gleaned from the Methodist and Evangelical Magazines a portion of real weakness and absurdity, though several of their extracts are such only in their opinion; and with this, by their comments, they have mixed a larger portion of misrepresentation. The best use that the editors of those publications can make of the critique will be to be more cautious than they have been in some instances; but whilę they pluck up the weeds there is no need to plant the deadly night-shade in their place. The Reviewer proposes, in a subsequent number to write an article on Missions. By the foregoing specimen we can be at no loss what to expect at his hand.

It has been said of the Edinburgh Review, that, "with a greater force of writing than the Monthly, it unites at least an equal rarcour against genuine Christianity, without that suspicion of Socinian and sectarian bias under which the other labours; while the barbarity, insolence, and pride, which it displays in almost all its criticisms, is sufficient to give it a prominence amongst the works of darkness." An attack on missions, from such a quarter, if not to their honour, cannot be to their dishonour; and if made by the writer of this article especially, will, it is hoped, produce no i!! effects.

STRICTURES

ON

MAJOR SCOTT WARING'S

THIRD PAMPHLET.

THE present performance is of a piece with this author's

other productions. The quantity of repetition surpasses any thing that I have been used to meet with in writers of the most ordinary talents. The foul spirit which pervades it is much the same, upon the whole, as heretofore. It is true, there is much less acrimony towards many of his opponents; but what is taken from them is laid upon the Missionaries. The title of it might have been, War with the Missionaries, and Peace with all the world besides. The remarks on the critique of The Christian Observer, are so many advances for a separate peace. The same may be said of his compliments to the members of the Church of Scotland, to the Arminian Methodists to the United Brethren, and to all indeed who have not sent Missionaries to India. He has found some difficulty, however, in ranking under this head the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, whom he will not allow to have sent out any Missionaries to India, but merely to have given pecuniary assistance; and that only, it seems, in former times. Their own Reports, however, speak a different language: they express their desire of sending Missionaries, provided any could be found to be

sent.

The sum is, our author and his party are aware of their having erred in their first attack. By making it on so extended a scale, they shocked the feelings of the Christian world, and drew upon themselves their united and indignant censures. But what is to be done? Having committed an error, they must repair it as well as they are able; and there is no way of doing this but by endeavouring to divide their opponents. With all his antipathy to the Evangelical Clergy, the Major would make peace with them, and grant them almost any terms, so that they would be neutrals in his war of extermination against the Missionaries.

Having requested a friend in town to furnish the Major with the First Part of my Apology, he had no sooner dipt into it than he proclaimed, in his preface, that I had "put beyond the possibility of future doubt the correctness of his private information;" that is, by publishing Mr. Carey's letter, in which he speaks of alarms which had been spread through India. After this, no person, he presumes, will venture to say that an alarm was not spread through India in 1806 and 1807, relative to Missionaries. (p. vi.) But whoever denied that an alarm was spread among Europeans, throughout India? I knew that at each of the three presidencies these alarms had been industriously circulated, and strange reports added to them, as that the Missionaries, or at least Mr. Carey, were imprisoned, &c. &c. It was of these alarms that I understood, and still understand Mr. Carey to have written, and not of any which were entertained by the native population of India, which is the point that our author's private information aims to establish. From the date of the Vellore mutiny, there can be no doubt of alarms having existed throughout the country among Europeans; and in Mr. Carey's opinion, so far as they related to the plans of Christian Missionaries, they were fabricated by Deists, who availed themselves of that and other circumstances to answer an end.

He adds, "On the 13th of Feb, 1807, Mr. Carey writes, A number of persons were preparing to embark for Europe with a view to spread the alarm at home." Mr. Carey writes no such thing. Whatever merit or demerit there may be in that paragraph, it belongs to the apologist, and not to Mr. Carey. This, if

our author had been a little less in hurry, he must have perceived. Mr. Carey, instead of having communicated it is supposed not to be aware of it. And though it is there intimated that a number of persons were at that time preparing to embark, with a view to spread the alarms at home, yet it was never imagined that this was their sole view, in returning to Europe.

There is no difficulty in understanding the Major, when he suggests that Mr. Carey must have included the Governor of Ceylon, and the Governor-General and Council of Bengal among the Deists who swarm in India, "because they have very effectually opposed the plans of the Missionaries." (p. viii.) Of the former I have heard nothing, except from our author, and therefore hope it may resemble many other things of his communicating. And as to the latter, if any such effectual opposition has been made, as he appears to hope for, it is unknown to me. But if it have, it is no new thing for Deists so far to conceal their motives as to influence public measures, even those in which men of very different principles preside.

I have no inclination to follow this writer through one tenth of his wranglings and repetitions; nor is there any need of it. It will be sufficient, if, after a few general remarks, I answer his most serious charges against the Missionaries.

The Major intimates, that if his assertion of Mr. Ward's having impiously perverted a passage of the holy gospel could be disproved, that were coming to an issue. (p. 22.) If it were in the power of evidence to convince him on this subject, he would be convinced by what is alleged by the Christian Observer. But the truth is, as Dr. Johnson is said to have bluntly expressed it, in answering an ignorant opponent, We may offer evidence but we cannot furnish men with understanding.

It is still persisted in, that missions, or Bibles, sent into a country where we had engaged to preserve to them the free exercise of religion, amount to a violation of the public faith. (p. 8.) The free exercise of one religion then, it seems, is inconsistent with the free offer of another. The next proposal to government may be for the silencing of Protestant Dissenters; for so long as they are allowed to preach in the country, the members of the National

Church, according to his reasoning, have not the free exercise of their religion.

When converts to Christianity are mentioned, the Major calls out, "Where are they? Who are they? I can find no account of them in the Missionary Reports." (p. 18.) He speaks, however, in another place, of the "nonsense that we may read in the Missionary Reports, relative to the success of the Missionaries, in making numerous converts to Christianity. (p. 33.) If he has read the last four or five Reports of The Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, he must there have met with the largest portion of this kind of nonsense that has appeared of late years, particularly in the communications of Mr. Gericke. And, as he has examined the Baptist Periodical Accounts, he cannot have overlooked the list of the baptised in No. XV. down to Nov. 1804. He must there have seen several brahmans among them, and also several Mahometans, and consequently have known his private accounts to be unfounded. But perhaps he will answer, as in p. 73, "This is an atrocious falsehood." We leave the reader to judge from what has been said, and what may yet be said, to whom the charge of falsehood belongs. Meanwhile, if our author be determined to disbelieve the accounts, let him disbelieve them; but let him not say they are not to be found in the Missionary Reports, and at the same time accuse those Reports of nonsense for relating them!

It is remarkable with what facility the Major picks up the discordant principles of other men, and sews them together in a sort of patch-work. One while the Bishop of St. Asaph seemed to be his oracle: now the Barrister is every thing. Getting hold of him, he can mimic the Socinian, and declaim against John Calvin. The Bishop of St. Asaph would have censured him for traducing Calvin, for whom he professed a high respect. But when a man has no principles of his own, what can he do? He had better not borrow those of others, however, till he knows how to use them.

By the frequent recurrence of such terms as hot-headed maniucs, madmen, mad Calvinists, mad Baptists, &c. &c. it would seem as if the gentleman himself was scarcely sober. Had this raving kind of diction been confined to his later publications, we might