tion upon the Committee of that Institution, which, as I believe, is undeserved. Some important facts, indeed, connected with the matter in question, you have not noticed, or, have only alluded to; but from the whole aspect of the article to which I refer, I feel persuaded, that it is only from the unavoidable brevity with which you have noticed the subject, that any erroneous impression has been produced. will, I am sure, be most ready to admit any explanation that can be offered; and will, therefore, give insertion to the following remarks; which may, I hope, be found to give a correct account of the present state of the controversy.

You

The printing of the Turkish Testament was taken in hand at a comparatively early period in the history of the Bible Society, and it certainly appears probable, that the examination of the manuscript was not so careful, nor the directions given to the editors so cautious and explicit, as experience has now shown to be necessary. Be this as it may; when the character of the Turkish version of the Scriptures was brought before the Committee by Dr. Henderson, the New Testament was already printed; and the question was not, whether it were expedient to revise it before going to press, but, whether its defects were such, as to render it necessary that the whole edition, already completed, and ready for use, should be suppressed and destroyed. Such a step as this, the Committee were naturally most anxious to avoid; and, after long investigation, and a collection of opinions on the subject from various quarters, they came to the conclusion, that the edition in question, after undergoing certain corrections, would not be unfit for circulation. These corrections consisted, in cancelling eight leaves of the book, in which the more important errors occurred, and substituting in their room others in which those errors were corrected, and also, in placing at the end, a table of errata pointing out several other mistakes of less moment.

Thus corrected, the version was sent forth, and it has been received and read, according to recent accounts from Constantinople, with great interest and attention. It is true, indeed, that some objectionable expressions which are of continual recurrence, could not be re

moved by the methods above described; such as, the addition of a title to the name Jesus, and the phrases used, instead of the simple term Allah, God. But with respect to these, though I do not undertake to defend or justify them, yet I cannot but assert, and I believe Dr. Henderson will not contradict the assertion, that to a Turk they convey no other idea whatever, than the words "God" and the "Lord Jesus" would convey to our English ear, whatever may be their etymological signification. As to the expres

sion "Lady Mary," which is mentioned in your last article, it occurred only once, and that leaf is cancelled. Nor do the phrases in question give the work a Mahometan character, for they are used by the Christian writers and translators among the Greeks; who, however degenerate in many particulars, may yet upon such a point as this, be appealed to, as of some authority.

He

One more important fact remains to be noticed. Professor Kieffer, since the publication of the Testament in question, has undertaken an edition of the whole Bible in Turkish from the same manuscript, which is already far advanced. Now, upon what principles is he carrying on this work? has been directed by a resolution of the Committee in London, "to purify the text from every thing extraneous or supplementary, as far as the genius of the Turkish language will permit." And upon this resolution he is acting. He has expunged all the titles and objectionable expressions complained of, and is, in short, bringing out the work in a shape, against which, as it appears, Dr. Henderson himself does not now entertain any serious objections. (See Henderson's "Turkish Testament incapable of Defence," p. 92-95, 294-298.)

Thus, then, Sir, I cannot but hope that the question, so far as the Committee of the Bible Society are concerned, is set at rest. The controversy now lies between Dr. Henderson and Professor Lee, as to the principles of criticism which they have respectively maintained; and, lamentable surely it will be, if such a controversy should be prolonged. Dr. Henderson has now appeared last upon the field; and, if I might presume to offer an opinion, I should say that his antagonist will

but show his wisdom by leaving him there.

As a sincere friend to Professor Lee, I cannot but deeply lament, that, in the warmth of controversy, he has appeared to defend and justify principles and modes of translation, which, it would have been enough to explain, or palliate. In practice, as an editor, he has never acted upon such principles himself; as Dr. Henderson has already observed. In the article, indeed, in your last Number, he is said to have been the principal editor of the very work now in question. But that was not the case; he had no superintendence of it. And I feel confidence in asserting, that in the editions of Scripture which he has himself published for the Society, nothing will be found wanting, which learning, diligence, and piety, could contribute to their perfection.

Remarks have been made, both in the article referred to and in other places, on the unkind and contemptuous language which the Professor is considered to have used towards his antagonist. But I would entreat both Dr. Henderson himself, and his friends, to consider, that the difference in the constitution of men's minds, and in their style of writing, is very great. Some may not have, perhaps, so delicate a sensibility, as to what may appear harsh and uncourteous as others; and may thus sometimes give offence, without the least intention of doing so. I feel assured, that Professor Lee has no such intention. Again, it may sometimes happen, that a man of great learning and power of intellect, may yet have a perplexed and indistinct mode of conducting an argument, and when such is the case, he is perhaps himself misunderstood, and he appears, moreover, to misunderstand and misrepresent others. Thus irritation is produced, and sharp contests arise, about matters on which both parties are in

the main agreed. Whether any of

these observations will apply to the case before us, others must decide.

I have only to add, that no one is responsible for any statement or opinion contained in these lines, but the writer of them alone. I am, Sir, Respectfully your's,

We have felt it to be our duty, as the ardent supporters of the BRITISH and FOREIGN BIBLE SOCIETY, to permit the insertion of the above article,-anarticle distinguished by a spirit of exemplary mildness. At the same time, we cannot allow, for a moment, that it meets the case fairly. So far as it tends to correct any slight inaccuracy in our statement, we hail it with gratitude, because we had no wish to misrepresent; but we dare not pronounce it to be a satisfactory justification, either of the Committee of the Bible Society, or of Professor Lee. With regard to the former, we maintain, with affectionate concern for their welfare, that the moment they discovered they had printed an unworthy translation of the LIVING ORACLES, they were bound to consign it to oblivion; and, in regard to Professor Lee, we still hold, that his avowed principles of Biblical translation are exceedingly vague, and that his treatment of Dr. Henderson has been very far from courteous. At the same time, we regard Professor Lee and the Bible Committee with sentiments of profound regard, and hope to live and die defenders of the great Biblical cause.-EDITOR.

ON MINISTERS ATTENDING THE ANNUAL MEETINGS OF THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY.

THE annual meetings of this Society, as they afford an opportunity of laying before its friends and the públic a statement of its operatious, are at the same time the means of stimulating those who attend, to renewed activity and diligence in promoting the interests of religion, both at home and abroad; and, perhaps, there are none who feel their influence more beneficially than the numerous ministers who are present on these occasions. Whilst listening

to the eloquent and affecting appeals which are then addressed to Christian feeling and liberality on behalf of the perishing heathen, both from the pulpit and the platform, their zeal has received a fresh stimulus, and they have returned to their respective scenes of labour, having their hearts fired with a holy

determination more than ever to seek the interests of the Redeemer's kingdom.

And as ministers are often the means of influencing their people, who generally partake, in some measure, of the spirit of their religious instructors, their visits to these annual festivals are in this respect productive of the happiest affects. When, on the first Mabbath

after their return home, they have detailed to their congregations the interesting intelligence to which they have listened respecting the progress of the gospel in the world, the hearts of their Christian friends have been cheered by the assurance, that the cause of that Redeemer, whom they love, is extending itself in lands that have been sitting in darkness, and in the shadow of death. Nor does the influence of Ministers visiting the metropolis on these occasions terminate here, but many of their hearers have been led to attend the missionary anniversaries for themselves, and have imbibed a similar spirit of holy concern for the welfare of Zion, which they have been the means of diffusing, in some measure, through their families and connections. Besides this, many of our young people who have been employed in collecting for the missionary cause, have been encouraged to engage in this work with redoubled ardour by the pleasing information to which, on these occasions, they have listened, and, whilst those who have been placed in affluent circumstances have been stimulated to be more liberal in their contributions for the advancement of this great object, the pious poor, who have been able to contribute little more than the widow's mite, have presented, with increased fervour, the " prayer of the righteous, which availeth much;" that the Lord would cause his "way to be known upon the earth, his saving health among all nations."

This, I believe, will not be found a too highly-coloured description of the beneficial effects resulting from the annual visits of Ministers to the meetings of this Society. It becomes, therefore, a matter of considerable importance, that all Ministers, whom age and infirmity does not prevent, and who are the friends of this Society, should be present on these peculiarly delightful seasons. But there are many excellent men who are under the necessity of being absent; the claims of a numerous family, or a contracted income, render their attendance impossible in the place "whither the tribes go up." But is there no remedy? Yes; it is, that all the congregations who have it in their power, should imitate the example of a congregation with which the writer of this is familiarly acquainted, who Annually present their beloved pastor

with a sum to defray the expense of his journey to London during the missionary week, for which affectionate attention they are amply rewarded by the delightful accounts to which they listen on the following Sabbath. May many be disposed to go and do like. wise!

A FRIEND TO THE MISSIONS.

HINTS ON OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS.

MR. EDITOR,

As the great Religious and Charitable FESTIVALS of the Metropolis are about to be celebrated, give me leave, as a warmly attached friend to the benevolent efforts of the day, to drop a hint or two, through the medium of your widely circulated and truly liberal miscellany;-in doing so, allow me, to assure your pious and intelligent readers that I am no cynic, and that the advice I am anxious to tender, is the result of most friendly though anxious observation.

And FIRST, then, as to LONG REPORTS; will you pardon me, if I say, that ninety-nine out of a hundred can scarcely tolerate them; and the reasons are twofold;—first, they attend the annual meetings of our Societies principally for the purpose of legitimate excitement; and, second, they know full well that they can see the Reports of the different Societies when printed. In this common-sense-view of the subject I cannot but agree with them, and I would fain hope that all Secretaries and Committees will do the same. Might not a judicious abstract answer every useful purpose, and exalt the general estimate of the practical wisdom of those who take the lead in the Heaven-directed cause of Charity and Christian beneficence? Should tedious Reports be even deemed necessary, I venture to predict, that the public taste, will, ere long, completely exorcise them; and it is surely proper that the officers of the various Societies which adorn our land, should open their ears to a complaint which is uttered by almost every mouth, and which may be heard from one end of the kingdom to the other.